LGCS 199DR: Independent Study in Pragmatics


 Gloria Richards
 1 years ago
 Views:
Transcription
1 LGCS 99DR: Independent Study in Pragmatics Jesse Harris & Meredith Landman September 0, 203 Last class, we discussed the difference between semantics and pragmatics: Semantics The study of the literal meaning of words and phrases, and the way in which they combine to form more complex literal meanings. Pragmatics The study of how literal meaning gives rise to the intended meaning of an utterance in context. Philosopher H. Paul Grice introduced several terms of art, including a fundamental distinction between what was said and what was intended. Although these terms are a little vague, and sometimes disputed, we ll assume an intuitive distinction in this class: What was said The literal meaning of an sentence (semantics) In the sense in which I am using the word say, I intend what someone has said to be closely related to the conventional meaning of the words (the sentence) he has uttered. (Grice, 975: 25) H. Paul Grice What was intended The utterance meaning (pragmatics) How would you identify what was said and what was intended in Meredith s utterance? () A fictional conversation: Jesse: John is such a jerk, don t you think? Meredith: You know, I just can t believe this weather.
2 Pragmatics deals with the context dependent, nontruthconditional interpretation of an utterance. To fully understand how pragmatics works, we first need to understand how truthconditions relate to literal meaning in general. Meaning is notoriously elusive. We follow the advice of philosopher David Lewis, advice which we might (affectionately) call the Forest Gump approach (Meaning is what meaning does). In order to say what a meaning is, we may first ask what a meaning does, and then find something that does that. (Lewis, 970: 22) David Lewis This of course raises the issue what does meaning do? Whatever our theory of meaning ultimately looks like, it should honor the following intuitions: What does meaning do?. Meaning describes the world. 2. Meaning allows relationships between expressions: contradiction, entailment, and synonymy. 3. Meaning is productive. Once you know the meaning of two things, you usually have a darn good chance of knowing what they mean when combined. The first criterion can be taken in a couple of different ways. Semanticists tend to think of the relationship between meaning and world in terms of truth conditions: Truth conditions You know the meaning of a sentence S from language L when you know under what conditions S is true. This is all to say that I know what a sentence S means when I know when it is true and when it is false. To know the truth conditions of S doesn t imply that S is true, just that you recognize how the world would look like if it were true. Let s take a look at a concrete, if absurd, example. 2
3 (2) Most Martians feast on cotton candy. I ll be honest: I have no idea if Martians actually eat cotton candy, let alone feast on it (let alone whether there are actually such things as Martians). But if there were such things as Martians, and most of them eat cotton candy and adore it, then I m prepared to say that the sentence (2) is true. If any of those conditions are false, e.g., Martians are serverly allergic to cotton candy, then I m confident that (2) is, in fact, false. Turning to the second criterion namely, that meaning allows relationships between expressions, let s turn to examples of semantic relations: contradition, entailment, and synonymy. (3) Contradiction a. All Martians feast on cotton candy. b. Some Martians don t eat cotton candy. I know that this is a contradiction, even without knowing whether each sentence is true. Relationships between sentences holds by virtue of their form. The more subdued case illustrates a similar point: each clause in (4) cannot simultaneously be true. (4) Contradiction Dylan is brave and Dylan is not brave. Entailment is quite different than contradition. If sentence S entails sentence T, then T cannot be true without S also being true. So, if S is true, then T must also be true. (5) Entailment a. Three detectives failed to find the killer. b. Two detectives failed to find the killer. (6) Entailment a. John brought an apple for lunch. b. John brought a fruit for lunch. It s not enough for both sentences to be true. Although both sentences in (7) might be true, neither one depends on the other. It s perfectly possible, for example, then although John brought an apple, Cindy has brought nothing at all. (7) John brought an apple for lunch and Cindy brought some crackers. Further, just because S entails T, doesn t necessarily mean that T entails S. For example, switch (a) and (b) in (6) above. Does bringing fruit entail bringing an apple? Definitely not! If John brought some fruit, he could have brought an orange instead. 3
4 When sentences S and T entail the other, then S and T are synonymous. Two sentences are synonymous just in case one cannot be true with the other also being true. (8) Synonymy a. Sue hugged Lydia. b. Lydia was hugged by Sue. These sentences describe the exact same scenario. But this is not to say that picking one over the other is arbitrary. The passive version (b) is noncanonical and might be used in special circumstances, for example to highlight Lydia over Sue. These considerations fall under the domain of Information Structure, a topic which we hope to discuss in a few weeks. In addition, terms like soda and pop may be synonymous, but carry different connotations or be preferred for reasons of dialect: (9) Synonymy a. Sam drank a soda. b. Sam drank a pop. Again, the semantic relations of contradiction, entailment, and synonymy are semantic in nature. Logic is a system that is particularly good at treating such relations. There are many kinds of logic: propositional, predicate, modal, fuzzy, temporal, nonmonotonic, etc. These logics share a few things in common. A logic has a set of primitive symbols, rules for generating formulas (expressions) of the language, and rules of inference. We ll focus on propositional logic here. Propositional logic trades in propositions. Just how to define the term proposition is no simple matter, especially among philosophers of language. Let s avoid that debate and settle on a vague, but simple, definition. Proposition A bearer of truth or falsity. Sentences express propositions, but not uniquely so. For example, synonymous sentences will express the same proposition. We might also think that an English sentence might share a proposition with its translation in, say, Hindi. So, though propositions are expressed by sentences, they are also independent of sentences. The sentence Reginald opened the refrigerator only to find an elephant dancing about in the butter expresses a proposition, even if the sentence is never uttered. In the Tractatus, Ludwig Wittgenstein famously proposed that the world is everything that is the case. That is, we could give a complete description of the world if only we cared to list all the true propositions (facts) about the world. 4
5 But this world could have turned out differently. I ll rely on your commonsense intuitions here to make my point. For example, this class could have been taught by someone else, Jay Atlas say, rather than us. Or I could have worn a different shirt than I did. Or you could have decided to skip class and lay out in the sun. The world is what it is, but you probably think that it could have turned differently than (unless you re a predeterminist or a fatalist). Think of a proposition as something that is potentially true or false depending on how the world actually is. Assume that we have just two types of truth the True (represented as or ) and the False (represented as 0 or F or sometimes even ). For example, chances are good that you don t know what month the person sitting to your left was born in. Here s a proposition: (0) The person sitting next to you was born in March. You re going to be right () or wrong (0) about this there are only two possibilities. So much for propositions. The language of propositional logic consist of a basic vocabulary (atomic propositions) and a syntax for generating wellformed expressions (complex propositions) via sentential connectives. Sentential connective Logical connective (Additional symbols) not and & or if... then... if and only if () Syntax for propositional logic L i. Propositional letters standing for atomic propositions p, q, r, etc. in the vocabulary of L are formulas in L. ii. If p is a formula in L, then p is a formula in L, too. iii.if p and q are formulas in L, then (p q), (p q), (p q), and (p q) are formulas in L, too. iv.only that which can be generated by the clauses (i) (iii) in a finite number of steps is a formula in L. 5
6 Ex.. Which of the following are wellformed formulas of L? a. ( p q) e. p ((p q)) b. p (q) f. (p (p q) q) c. (q) g. ( p p) d. ((p p) (q p)) h. (p q r) For example, let p represent Padma is sick and q represent Quincy left early. We can form all kinds of fascinating fomulas: Ex. 2. Translate the formula into English: (2) a. p q b. ((p q) p) c. (p (q (p p))) Ex. 3. Translate the English sentences into propositional logic. You may have to use your intuitions. (3) a. If Padma isn t sick, then Quincy didn t leave early. b. Padma is sick or Padma isn t sick but Quincy left early. c. Because Padma is sick, Quincy left early. We also need a way to interpret all the expressions that our propositional language gives us. Truth tables provide a snapshot of all various ways in which the world might be, and allows to evaluate a complex proposition. p 0 Simple truth table All the possibilities for some proposition p. For example, if p = Padma is sick, then p is either true, in which case she is sick, or false, in which case she s not. Truth tables come in handy when considering more complex expressions. A truth table must specify every possible combination. Since we have two values (true and false), the number of rows in a truth table equals 2 n, where n is the number of unique propositions p, q, r and so on. 6
7 p q r Hint on specifying truth tables Start with the leftmost atomic proposition, p, and write alternating s and 0 s. Then move to the next atomic proposition, q, in the table and write two s, followed by two 0 s. You have a third proposition, r, so write four s, followed by four 0 s. And so on for 2 n rows. Here we have 3 propositions, p, q, r and so 2 3 = = 8 rows. You can give the table a rough check by making sure that each column of atomic propositions has the same number of s and 0 s. We can define the sentence operators above (,,,, ) by defining the conditions in which they are true for arbitrary propositional letters p and q. Let s use our natural language intuitions to guide us. p p 0 0 Negation (4) Padma isn t sick Note: Treated as equivalent to It s not the case the Padma is sick. p q p q p q p q Conjunction (5) Padma is sick and Quincy left early Disjunction (6) Padma is sick or Quincy left early 7
8 So far so good. The next one is tricky. Consider the case where Padma isn t sick (p = 0). What do we say about the conditional? This situation has been heavily debated by logicians. The classical view is that when the antecedent (on the left of the conditional) is false, the entire conditional statement is true, regardless of whether the consequent (on the right side of the conditional) is true or false. One way to justify this intuition is to translate if as something like supposing that. If the supposition in the antecedent fails, we can t really blame the conditional. Since we re working with a twovalued truthconditional theory, each statement must be either true or false. And to many logicians, we simply can t call these kinds of statements false if the supposition doesn t come through. A related way to view this decision is to think of the conditional as a kind of wager, When p happens, I ll bet that q. If p doesn t happen, do we lose the bet? Most logicians would say that your prediction is not false at least and given the lack of other options, are content to call it true. At any rate, I ve gone ahead and filled in the relevant rows in advance. p q p q Material conditional (7) If Padma is sick, then Quincy left early The material conditional also gives us a chance to acknowledge that logic does not map onto language use perfectly. Statements of the if... then form are often used in very different ways, for example, to express a causal relationship between antecedent and consequent. There are, as a result, many different proposals for treating conditional statement which are argued to better fit natural language. p q p q Biconditional (8) Padma is sick if and only if Quincy left early Speakers tend not to use the biconditional in this form very often. common locution would be just in case or only if. Perhaps a more 8
9 Here s another case where propositional logic doesn t totally converge with natural language: p p p 0 Law of double negation (9) Padma is sick It s not the case that Padma isn t sick Finally, we get to cases of logical constancy: tautology and contradiction. p p p p 0 p p p p 0 Tautology A formula φ is a (logical) tautology iff φ is true in all possible situations. (20) Padma is sick iff it s not the case that Padma is not sick Contradiction A formula φ is a (logical) contradiction iff φ is false in all possible situations. (2) Padma is sick and Padma is not sick Ex. 4. How would you test whether two propositions are truthconditionally equivalent using truth tables? Take the following case as an example: (p q) and ( p q) Next week: We ll talk about how Grice proposed to treat cases in which the logical, literal meaning diverged from what was conveyed by an utterance. 9
What are TruthTables and What Are They For?
PY114: Work Obscenely Hard Week 9 (Meeting 7) 30 November, 2010 What are TruthTables and What Are They For? 0. Business Matters: The last marked homework of term will be due on Monday, 6 December, at
More informationLing 98a: The Meaning of Negation (Week 1)
Yimei Xiang yxiang@fas.harvard.edu 17 September 2013 1 What is negation? Negation in twovalued propositional logic Based on your understanding, select out the metaphors that best describe the meaning
More informationArtificial Intelligence: Valid Arguments and Proof Systems. Prof. Deepak Khemani. Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Artificial Intelligence: Valid Arguments and Proof Systems Prof. Deepak Khemani Department of Computer Science and Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Madras Module 02 Lecture  03 So in the last
More informationSAVING RELATIVISM FROM ITS SAVIOUR
CRÍTICA, Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía Vol. XXXI, No. 91 (abril 1999): 91 103 SAVING RELATIVISM FROM ITS SAVIOUR MAX KÖLBEL Doctoral Programme in Cognitive Science Universität Hamburg In his paper
More informationModule 5. Knowledge Representation and Logic (Propositional Logic) Version 2 CSE IIT, Kharagpur
Module 5 Knowledge Representation and Logic (Propositional Logic) Lesson 12 Propositional Logic inference rules 5.5 Rules of Inference Here are some examples of sound rules of inference. Each can be shown
More informationLogic & Proofs. Chapter 3 Content. Sentential Logic Semantics. Contents: Studying this chapter will enable you to:
Sentential Logic Semantics Contents: TruthValue Assignments and TruthFunctions TruthValue Assignments TruthFunctions Introduction to the TruthLab TruthDefinition Logical Notions TruthTrees Studying
More informationTWO VERSIONS OF HUME S LAW
DISCUSSION NOTE BY CAMPBELL BROWN JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION NOTE MAY 2015 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT CAMPBELL BROWN 2015 Two Versions of Hume s Law MORAL CONCLUSIONS CANNOT VALIDLY
More informationTheories of propositions
Theories of propositions phil 93515 Jeff Speaks January 16, 2007 1 Commitment to propositions.......................... 1 2 A Fregean theory of reference.......................... 2 3 Three theories of
More informationFrom Necessary Truth to Necessary Existence
Prequel for Section 4.2 of Defending the Correspondence Theory Published by PJP VII, 1 From Necessary Truth to Necessary Existence Abstract I introduce new details in an argument for necessarily existing
More informationDay 3. Wednesday May 23, Learn the basic building blocks of proofs (specifically, direct proofs)
Day 3 Wednesday May 23, 2012 Objectives: Learn the basics of Propositional Logic Learn the basic building blocks of proofs (specifically, direct proofs) 1 Propositional Logic Today we introduce the concepts
More informationExercise Sets. KS Philosophical Logic: Modality, Conditionals Vagueness. Dirk Kindermann University of Graz July 2014
Exercise Sets KS Philosophical Logic: Modality, Conditionals Vagueness Dirk Kindermann University of Graz July 2014 1 Exercise Set 1 Propositional and Predicate Logic 1. Use Definition 1.1 (Handout I Propositional
More informationPresupposition: An (un)common attitude?
Presupposition: An (un)common attitude? Abstract In this paper I argue that presupposition should be thought of as a propositional attitude. I will separate questions on truth from questions of presupposition
More informationA. Problem set #3 it has been posted and is due Tuesday, 15 November
Lecture 9: Propositional Logic I Philosophy 130 1 & 3 November 2016 O Rourke & Gibson I. Administrative A. Problem set #3 it has been posted and is due Tuesday, 15 November B. I am working on the group
More informationVerificationism. PHIL September 27, 2011
Verificationism PHIL 83104 September 27, 2011 1. The critique of metaphysics... 1 2. Observation statements... 2 3. In principle verifiability... 3 4. Strong verifiability... 3 4.1. Conclusive verifiability
More informationQuantificational logic and empty names
Quantificational logic and empty names Andrew Bacon 26th of March 2013 1 A Puzzle For Classical Quantificational Theory Empty Names: Consider the sentence 1. There is something identical to Pegasus On
More informationAyer on the criterion of verifiability
Ayer on the criterion of verifiability November 19, 2004 1 The critique of metaphysics............................. 1 2 Observation statements............................... 2 3 In principle verifiability...............................
More informationScott Soames: Understanding Truth
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Vol. LXV, No. 2, September 2002 Scott Soames: Understanding Truth MAlTHEW MCGRATH Texas A & M University Scott Soames has written a valuable book. It is unmatched
More informationNegative Facts. Negative Facts Kyle Spoor
54 Kyle Spoor Logical Atomism was a view held by many philosophers; Bertrand Russell among them. This theory held that language consists of logical parts which are simplifiable until they can no longer
More informationWilliams on Supervaluationism and Logical Revisionism
Williams on Supervaluationism and Logical Revisionism Nicholas K. Jones Noncitable draft: 26 02 2010. Final version appeared in: The Journal of Philosophy (2011) 108: 11: 633641 Central to discussion
More informationAn Introduction to. Formal Logic. Second edition. Peter Smith, February 27, 2019
An Introduction to Formal Logic Second edition Peter Smith February 27, 2019 Peter Smith 2018. Not for reposting or recirculation. Comments and corrections please to ps218 at cam dot ac dot uk 1 What
More informationUC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016
Logical Consequence UC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016 John MacFarlane 1 Intuitive characterizations of consequence Modal: It is necessary (or apriori) that, if the premises are true, the conclusion
More informationComments on Truth at A World for Modal Propositions
Comments on Truth at A World for Modal Propositions Christopher Menzel Texas A&M University March 16, 2008 Since Arthur Prior first made us aware of the issue, a lot of philosophical thought has gone into
More information4.1 A problem with semantic demonstrations of validity
4. Proofs 4.1 A problem with semantic demonstrations of validity Given that we can test an argument for validity, it might seem that we have a fully developed system to study arguments. However, there
More informationIs the law of excluded middle a law of logic?
Is the law of excluded middle a law of logic? Introduction I will conclude that the intuitionist s attempt to rule out the law of excluded middle as a law of logic fails. They do so by appealing to harmony
More informationChapter 8  Sentential Truth Tables and Argument Forms
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall Stetson University Chapter 8  Sentential ruth ables and Argument orms 8.1 Introduction he truthvalue of a given truthfunctional compound proposition depends
More informationPhilosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics. Critical Thinking Lecture 1. Background Material for the Exercise on Validity
Philosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics Critical Thinking Lecture 1 Background Material for the Exercise on Validity Reasons, Arguments, and the Concept of Validity 1. The Concept of Validity Consider
More informationA Problem for a DirectReference Theory of Belief Reports. Stephen Schiffer New York University
A Problem for a DirectReference Theory of Belief Reports Stephen Schiffer New York University The directreference theory of belief reports to which I allude is the one held by such theorists as Nathan
More informationILLOCUTIONARY ORIGINS OF FAMILIAR LOGICAL OPERATORS
ILLOCUTIONARY ORIGINS OF FAMILIAR LOGICAL OPERATORS 1. ACTS OF USING LANGUAGE Illocutionary logic is the logic of speech acts, or language acts. Systems of illocutionary logic have both an ontological,
More informationPART III  Symbolic Logic Chapter 7  Sentential Propositions
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University 7.1 Introduction PART III  Symbolic Logic Chapter 7  Sentential Propositions What has been made abundantly clear in the previous discussion
More informationWhat is the Nature of Logic? Judy Pelham Philosophy, York University, Canada July 16, 2013 PanHellenic Logic Symposium Athens, Greece
What is the Nature of Logic? Judy Pelham Philosophy, York University, Canada July 16, 2013 PanHellenic Logic Symposium Athens, Greece Outline of this Talk 1. What is the nature of logic? Some history
More informationNature of Necessity Chapter IV
Nature of Necessity Chapter IV Robert C. Koons Department of Philosophy University of Texas at Austin koons@mail.utexas.edu February 11, 2005 1 Chapter IV. Worlds, Books and Essential Properties Worlds
More informationLogic: A Brief Introduction
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University PART III  Symbolic Logic Chapter 7  Sentential Propositions 7.1 Introduction What has been made abundantly clear in the previous discussion
More informationPart II: How to Evaluate Deductive Arguments
Part II: How to Evaluate Deductive Arguments Week 4: Propositional Logic and Truth Tables Lecture 4.1: Introduction to deductive logic Deductive arguments = presented as being valid, and successful only
More informationLogicola Truth Evaluation Exercises
Logicola Truth Evaluation Exercises The Logicola exercises for Ch. 6.3 concern truth evaluations, and in 6.4 this complicated to include unknown evaluations. I wanted to say a couple of things for those
More informationSemantic Entailment and Natural Deduction
Semantic Entailment and Natural Deduction Alice Gao Lecture 6, September 26, 2017 Entailment 1/55 Learning goals Semantic entailment Define semantic entailment. Explain subtleties of semantic entailment.
More informationCoordination Problems
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Vol. LXXXI No. 2, September 2010 Ó 2010 Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, LLC Coordination Problems scott soames
More informationA BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC FOR METAPHYSICIANS
A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC FOR METAPHYSICIANS 0. Logic, Probability, and Formal Structure Logic is often divided into two distinct areas, inductive logic and deductive logic. Inductive logic is concerned
More informationVAGUENESS. Francis Jeffry Pelletier and István Berkeley Department of Philosophy University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
VAGUENESS Francis Jeffry Pelletier and István Berkeley Department of Philosophy University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Vagueness: an expression is vague if and only if it is possible that it give
More informationCan logical consequence be deflated?
Can logical consequence be deflated? Michael De University of Utrecht Department of Philosophy Utrecht, Netherlands mikejde@gmail.com in Insolubles and Consequences : essays in honour of Stephen Read,
More informationxiv Truth Without Objectivity
Introduction There is a certain approach to theorizing about language that is called truthconditional semantics. The underlying idea of truthconditional semantics is often summarized as the idea that
More information3. Negations Not: contradicting content Contradictory propositions Overview Connectives
3. Negations 3.1. Not: contradicting content 3.1.0. Overview In this chapter, we direct our attention to negation, the second of the logical forms we will consider. 3.1.1. Connectives Negation is a way
More informationIntersubstitutivity Principles and the Generalization Function of Truth. Anil Gupta University of Pittsburgh. Shawn Standefer University of Melbourne
Intersubstitutivity Principles and the Generalization Function of Truth Anil Gupta University of Pittsburgh Shawn Standefer University of Melbourne Abstract We offer a defense of one aspect of Paul Horwich
More information1.2. What is said: propositions
1.2. What is said: propositions 1.2.0. Overview In 1.1.5, we saw the close relation between two properties of a deductive inference: (i) it is a transition from premises to conclusion that is free of any
More informationConditionals II: no truth conditions?
Conditionals II: no truth conditions? UC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016 John MacFarlane 1 Arguments for the material conditional analysis As Edgington [1] notes, there are some powerful reasons
More informationUnderstanding Belief Reports. David Braun. In this paper, I defend a wellknown theory of belief reports from an important objection.
Appeared in Philosophical Review 105 (1998), pp. 555595. Understanding Belief Reports David Braun In this paper, I defend a wellknown theory of belief reports from an important objection. The theory
More informationSome remarks on verificationism, constructivism and the Principle of Excluded Middle in the context of Colour Exclusion Problem
URRJ 5 th June, 2017 Some remarks on verificationism, constructivism and the Principle of Excluded Middle in the context of Colour Exclusion Problem Marcos Silva marcossilvarj@gmail.com https://sites.google.com/site/marcossilvarj/
More informationPHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS & THE ANALYSIS OF LANGUAGE
PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS & THE ANALYSIS OF LANGUAGE Now, it is a defect of [natural] languages that expressions are possible within them, which, in their grammatical form, seemingly determined to designate
More informationCan Negation be Defined in Terms of Incompatibility?
Can Negation be Defined in Terms of Incompatibility? Nils Kurbis 1 Abstract Every theory needs primitives. A primitive is a term that is not defined any further, but is used to define others. Thus primitives
More informationHaberdashers Aske s Boys School
1 Haberdashers Aske s Boys School Occasional Papers Series in the Humanities Occasional Paper Number Sixteen Are All Humans Persons? Ashna Ahmad Haberdashers Aske s Girls School March 2018 2 Haberdashers
More informationSubjective Logic: Logic as Rational Belief Dynamics. Richard Johns Department of Philosophy, UBC
Subjective Logic: Logic as Rational Belief Dynamics Richard Johns Department of Philosophy, UBC johns@interchange.ubc.ca May 8, 2004 What I m calling Subjective Logic is a new approach to logic. Fundamentally
More informationLOGIC ANTHONY KAPOLKA FYF 1019/3/2010
LOGIC ANTHONY KAPOLKA FYF 1019/3/2010 LIBERALLY EDUCATED PEOPLE......RESPECT RIGOR NOT SO MUCH FOR ITS OWN SAKE BUT AS A WAY OF SEEKING TRUTH. LOGIC PUZZLE COOPER IS MURDERED. 3 SUSPECTS: SMITH, JONES,
More informationLogic and Pragmatics: linear logic for inferential practice
Logic and Pragmatics: linear logic for inferential practice Daniele Porello danieleporello@gmail.com Institute for Logic, Language & Computation (ILLC) University of Amsterdam, Plantage Muidergracht 24
More informationPhilosophy 148 Announcements & Such. Inverse Probability and Bayes s Theorem II. Inverse Probability and Bayes s Theorem III
Branden Fitelson Philosophy 148 Lecture 1 Branden Fitelson Philosophy 148 Lecture 2 Philosophy 148 Announcements & Such Administrative Stuff I ll be using a straight grading scale for this course. Here
More informationOn Truth At Jeffrey C. King Rutgers University
On Truth At Jeffrey C. King Rutgers University I. Introduction A. At least some propositions exist contingently (Fine 1977, 1985) B. Given this, motivations for a notion of truth on which propositions
More informationG. H. von Wright Deontic Logic
G. H. von Wright Deontic Logic Kian MintzWoo University of Amsterdam January 9, 2009 January 9, 2009 Logic of Norms 2010 1/17 INTRODUCTION In von Wright s 1951 formulation, deontic logic is intended to
More informationMaudlin s Truth and Paradox Hartry Field
Maudlin s Truth and Paradox Hartry Field Tim Maudlin s Truth and Paradox is terrific. In some sense its solution to the paradoxes is familiar the book advocates an extension of what s called the KripkeFeferman
More informationLogic Appendix: More detailed instruction in deductive logic
Logic Appendix: More detailed instruction in deductive logic Standardizing and Diagramming In Reason and the Balance we have taken the approach of using a simple outline to standardize short arguments,
More informationLecture 3 Arguments Jim Pryor What is an Argument? Jim Pryor Vocabulary Describing Arguments
Lecture 3 Arguments Jim Pryor What is an Argument? Jim Pryor Vocabulary Describing Arguments 1 Agenda 1. What is an Argument? 2. Evaluating Arguments 3. Validity 4. Soundness 5. Persuasive Arguments 6.
More informationPragmatic Presupposition
Pragmatic Presupposition Read: Stalnaker 1974 481: Pragmatic Presupposition 1 Presupposition vs. Assertion The Queen of England is bald. I presuppose that England has a unique queen, and assert that she
More informationThe distinction between truthfunctional and nontruthfunctional logical and linguistic
FORMAL CRITERIA OF NONTRUTHFUNCTIONALITY Dale Jacquette The Pennsylvania State University 1. TruthFunctional Meaning The distinction between truthfunctional and nontruthfunctional logical and linguistic
More informationOverview of Today s Lecture
Branden Fitelson Philosophy 12A Notes 1 Overview of Today s Lecture Music: Robin Trower, Daydream (King Biscuit Flower Hour concert, 1977) Administrative Stuff (lots of it) Course Website/Syllabus [i.e.,
More informationIntermediate Logic Spring. Extreme Modal Realism
Intermediate Logic Spring Lecture Three Extreme Modal Realism Rob Trueman rob.trueman@york.ac.uk University of York 1 / 36 Introduction Extreme Modal Realism Introduction Extreme Modal Realism Why Believe
More informationLogic: A Brief Introduction. Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University 2012 CONTENTS Part I Critical Thinking Chapter 1 Basic Training 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Logic, Propositions and Arguments 1.3 Deduction and Induction
More information1. Introduction. Against GMR: The Incredulous Stare (Lewis 1986: 133 5).
Lecture 3 Modal Realism II James Openshaw 1. Introduction Against GMR: The Incredulous Stare (Lewis 1986: 133 5). Whatever else is true of them, today s views aim not to provoke the incredulous stare.
More informationPhilosophical Perspectives, 14, Action and Freedom, 2000 TRANSFER PRINCIPLES AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY. Eleonore Stump Saint Louis University
Philosophical Perspectives, 14, Action and Freedom, 2000 TRANSFER PRINCIPLES AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY Eleonore Stump Saint Louis University John Martin Fischer University of California, Riverside It is
More informationReply to Kit Fine. Theodore Sider July 19, 2013
Reply to Kit Fine Theodore Sider July 19, 2013 Kit Fine s paper raises important and difficult issues about my approach to the metaphysics of fundamentality. In chapters 7 and 8 I examined certain subtle
More informationSome Logical Paradoxes from Jean Buridan
Some Logical Paradoxes from Jean Buridan 1. A Chimera is a Chimera: A chimera is a mythological creature with the head of a lion, the body of a goat, and the tail of a snake. Obviously, chimeras do not
More informationAboutness and Justification
For a symposium on Imogen Dickie s book Fixing Reference to be published in Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. Aboutness and Justification Dilip Ninan dilip.ninan@tufts.edu September 2016 Al believes
More informationLecture 9: Presuppositions
Barbara H. Partee, MGU April 30, 2009 p. 1 Lecture 9: Presuppositions 1. The projection problem for presuppositions.... 1 2. Heim s analysis: Contextchange potential as explanation for presupposition
More informationA DEFINITION OF BELIEVING. R. G. Cronin
A DEFINITION OF BELIEVING R. G. Cronin It is the aim of this paper to present a formally correct and materially adequate analysis of what it is to believe paradigmatically that p. The object of the analysis
More informationPhil 413: Problem set #1
Phil 413: Problem set #1 For problems (1) (4b), if the sentence is as it stands false or senseless, change it to a true sentence by supplying quotes and/or corner quotes, or explain why no such alteration
More informationEpistemic twodimensionalism
Epistemic twodimensionalism phil 93507 Jeff Speaks December 1, 2009 1 Four puzzles.......................................... 1 2 Epistemic twodimensionalism................................ 3 2.1 Twodimensional
More informationGeneric truth and mixed conjunctions: some alternatives
Analysis Advance Access published June 15, 2009 Generic truth and mixed conjunctions: some alternatives AARON J. COTNOIR Christine Tappolet (2000) posed a problem for alethic pluralism: either deny the
More informationForeknowledge, evil, and compatibility arguments
Foreknowledge, evil, and compatibility arguments Jeff Speaks January 25, 2011 1 Warfield s argument for compatibilism................................ 1 2 Why the argument fails to show that free will and
More informationIdealism and the Harmony of Thought and Reality
Idealism and the Harmony of Thought and Reality Thomas Hofweber University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill hofweber@unc.edu Draft of September 26, 2017 for The Fourteenth Annual NYU Conference on Issues
More informationINTERMEDIATE LOGIC Glossary of key terms
1 GLOSSARY INTERMEDIATE LOGIC BY JAMES B. NANCE INTERMEDIATE LOGIC Glossary of key terms This glossary includes terms that are defined in the text in the lesson and on the page noted. It does not include
More informationConstructing the World
Constructing the World Lecture 1: A Scrutable World David Chalmers Plan *1. Laplace s demon 2. Primitive concepts and the Aufbau 3. Problems for the Aufbau 4. The scrutability base 5. Applications Laplace
More informationTEMPORAL NECESSITY AND LOGICAL FATALISM. by Joseph Diekemper
TEMPORAL NECESSITY AND LOGICAL FATALISM by Joseph Diekemper ABSTRACT I begin by briefly mentioning two different logical fatalistic argument types: one from temporal necessity, and one from antecedent
More informationBased on the translation by E. M. Edghill, with minor emendations by Daniel Kolak.
On Interpretation By Aristotle Based on the translation by E. M. Edghill, with minor emendations by Daniel Kolak. First we must define the terms 'noun' and 'verb', then the terms 'denial' and 'affirmation',
More informationDraft January 19, 2010 Draft January 19, True at. Scott Soames School of Philosophy USC. To Appear In a Symposium on
Draft January 19, 2010 Draft January 19, 2010 True at By Scott Soames School of Philosophy USC To Appear In a Symposium on Herman Cappelen and John Hawthorne Relativism and Monadic Truth In Analysis Reviews
More informationWRIGHT ON BORDERLINE CASES AND BIVALENCE 1
WRIGHT ON BORDERLINE CASES AND BIVALENCE 1 HAMIDREZA MOHAMMADI Abstract. The aim of this paper is, firstly to explain Crispin Wright s quandary view of vagueness, his intuitionistic response to sorites
More informationStudy Guides. Chapter 1  Basic Training
Study Guides Chapter 1  Basic Training Argument: A group of propositions is an argument when one or more of the propositions in the group is/are used to give evidence (or if you like, reasons, or grounds)
More informationOn possibly nonexistent propositions
On possibly nonexistent propositions Jeff Speaks January 25, 2011 abstract. Alvin Plantinga gave a reductio of the conjunction of the following three theses: Existentialism (the view that, e.g., the proposition
More informationOn Interpretation. Section 1. Aristotle Translated by E. M. Edghill. Part 1
On Interpretation Aristotle Translated by E. M. Edghill Section 1 Part 1 First we must define the terms noun and verb, then the terms denial and affirmation, then proposition and sentence. Spoken words
More informationAquinas' Third Way Modalized
Philosophy of Religion Aquinas' Third Way Modalized Robert E. Maydole Davidson College bomaydole@davidson.edu ABSTRACT: The Third Way is the most interesting and insightful of Aquinas' five arguments for
More informationInformalizing Formal Logic
Informalizing Formal Logic Antonis Kakas Department of Computer Science, University of Cyprus, Cyprus antonis@ucy.ac.cy Abstract. This paper discusses how the basic notions of formal logic can be expressed
More informationRussellianism and Explanation. David Braun. University of Rochester
Forthcoming in Philosophical Perspectives 15 (2001) Russellianism and Explanation David Braun University of Rochester Russellianism is a semantic theory that entails that sentences (1) and (2) express
More informationRuleFollowing and Constitutive Rules: A Reconciliation
RuleFollowing and Constitutive Rules: A Reconciliation Cyril Hédoin University of Reims ChampagneArdenne (France) Version 2.0: 19 th March 2017 Abstract: This article contrasts two broad approaches of
More informationWittgenstein s Logical Atomism. Seminar 8 PHIL2120 Topics in Analytic Philosophy 16 November 2012
Wittgenstein s Logical Atomism Seminar 8 PHIL2120 Topics in Analytic Philosophy 16 November 2012 1 Admin Required reading for this seminar: Soames, Ch 9+10 New Schedule: 23 November: The Tractarian Test
More informationReductio ad Absurdum, Modulation, and Logical Forms. Miguel LópezAstorga 1
International Journal of Philosophy and Theology June 25, Vol. 3, No., pp. 5965 ISSN: 2333575 (Print), 23335769 (Online) Copyright The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. Published by American Research
More informationBob Hale: Necessary Beings
Bob Hale: Necessary Beings Nils Kürbis In Necessary Beings, Bob Hale brings together his views on the source and explanation of necessity. It is a very thorough book and Hale covers a lot of ground. It
More informationSaying too Little and Saying too Much. Critical notice of Lying, Misleading, and What is Said, by Jennifer Saul
Saying too Little and Saying too Much. Critical notice of Lying, Misleading, and What is Said, by Jennifer Saul Umeå University BIBLID [0873626X (2013) 35; pp. 8191] 1 Introduction You are going to Paul
More informationEntailment as Plural Modal Anaphora
Entailment as Plural Modal Anaphora Adrian Brasoveanu SURGE 09/08/2005 I. Introduction. Meaning vs. Content. The Partee marble examples:  (1 1 ) and (2 1 ): different meanings (different anaphora licensing
More informationParadox of Deniability
1 Paradox of Deniability Massimiliano Carrara FISPPA Department, University of Padua, Italy Peking University, Beijing  6 November 2018 Introduction. The starting elements Suppose two speakers disagree
More informationIn Defense of Truth functional Theory of Indicative Conditionals. Ching Hui Su Postdoctoral Fellow Institution of European and American Studies,
In Defense of Truth functional Theory of Indicative Conditionals Ching Hui Su Postdoctoral Fellow Institution of European and American Studies, Academia Sinica, Taiwan SELLC 2010 Outline Truth functional
More informationConstructing the World
Constructing the World Lecture 3: The Case for A Priori Scrutability David Chalmers Plan *1. Sentences vs Propositions 2. Apriority and A Priori Scrutability 3. Argument 1: Suspension of Judgment 4. Argument
More informationArtificial Intelligence Prof. P. Dasgupta Department of Computer Science & Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Artificial Intelligence Prof. P. Dasgupta Department of Computer Science & Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Lecture 9 First Order Logic In the last class, we had seen we have studied
More informationCan Negation be Defined in Terms of Incompatibility?
Can Negation be Defined in Terms of Incompatibility? Nils Kurbis 1 Introduction Every theory needs primitives. A primitive is a term that is not defined any further, but is used to define others. Thus
More informationConstructing the World
Constructing the World Lecture 6: Whither the Aufbau? David Chalmers Plan *1. Introduction 2. Definitional, Analytic, Primitive Scrutability 3. Narrow Scrutability 4. Acquaintance Scrutability 5. Fundamental
More informationThe Substance of Ontological Disputes. Richard C. Lamb
The Substance of Ontological Disputes Richard C. Lamb Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
More information