Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    When Grice's maxims clash, there is no determinate way to... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    When Grice's maxims clash, there is no determinate way to establish what conformity to the Cooperative Principle requires.

    Philosophy of LanguageSkepticism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Grice acknowledged that his conversational maxims may conflict with one another.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When maxims conflict, following one maxim requires violating another, leaving no single path to full conformity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The Cooperative Principle itself functions as a meta-norm that adjudicates between maxims by privileging communicative success over maxim-compliance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Grice's own analysis of quality-quantity conflicts (e.g., irony, metaphor) demonstrates systematic resolution patterns, not indeterminacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Relevance theorists Sperber and Wilson show that apparent maxim conflicts dissolve under a single optimization principle: best contextual effect for least processing effort.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If maxim conflicts were genuinely indeterminate, pragmatic communication would produce systematic misunderstanding, which empirical psycholinguistics does not support.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismPhilosophy of Language

    Related

    Grice acknowledged that his conversational maxims may conflict with one another.Grice's own analysis of quality-quantity conflicts (e.g., irony, metaphor) demon...If maxim conflicts were genuinely indeterminate, pragmatic communication would p...Relevance theorists Sperber and Wilson show that apparent maxim conflicts dissol...
    +2 moreShow less
    The Cooperative Principle itself functions as a meta-norm that adjudicates betwe...When maxims conflict, following one maxim requires violating another, leaving no...

    Similar

    When maxims conflict, following one maxim requires violating another, ...90%Julie does not have sufficient grounds to embrace a contradiction79%Irony presents a genuine problem for Gricean pragmatics because it cre...78%Ironic utterances cannot be interpreted literally without violating th...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: implicature
    View source passageHide passage
    Grice (1975: 30) recognized that his maxims may “clash”. When they do, there is no way to determine what is required for conformity to the Cooperative Principle. In the case of irony, for example, Manner clashes with Quality. When Don said “The weather’s lovely”, we cannot interpret him as meaning what he said because on that interpretation he would be violating Quality. But we cannot interpret him as meaning the opposite because then he would be violating Manner (Wilson & Sperber 2012: 18–9
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit