Skip to main content
Log in

Epistemic modals, relativism and assertion

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Philosophical Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

I think that there are good reasons to adopt a relativist semantics for epistemic modal claims such as ``the treasure might be under the palm tree'', according to which such utterances determine a truth value relative to something finer-grained than just a world (or a <world, time> pair). Anyone who is inclined to relativise truth to more than just worlds and times faces a problem about assertion. It's easy to be puzzled about just what purpose would be served by assertions of this kind, and how to understand what we'd be up to in our use of sentences like ``the treasure might be under the palm tree'', if they have such peculiar truth conditions. After providing a very quick argument to motivate a relativist view of epistemic modals, I bring out and attempt to resolve this problem in making sense of the role of assertions with relativist truth conditions. Solving this problem should be helpful in two ways: first, it eliminates an apparently forceful objection to relativism, and second, spelling out the relativist account of assertion and communication will help to make clear just what the relativist position is, exactly, and why it's interesting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • DeRose, K. (1991). Epistemic possibilities. Philosophical Review, 100, 581–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egan, A., Hawthorne, J. & Weatherson, B. (forthcoming) In Preyer & Peters (Eds.), Epistemic modals in context, contextualism in philosophy. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

  • Hacking, I. (1967). Possibility. Philosophical Review, 76, 143–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasersohn, P. (MS) Context dependence, disagreement, and predicates of personal taste.

  • Lewis, D. (1979). Attitudes De Dicto and De Se. Philosophical Review, 88, 513–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacFarlane, J. (forthcoming a) Epistemic modalities and relative truth.

  • MacFarlane, J. (forthcoming b) The assessment sensitivity of knowledge attributions, forthcoming in Oxford studies in epistemology. Oxford University Press.

  • Perry, J. (1979). The problem of the essential indexical. Nous, 13, 3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stalnaker, R. (1978). Assertion. Syntax and Semantics, 9, 315–332.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Brian Weatherson, John Hawthorne, Daniel Stoljar, Frank Jackson, Ben Blumson, Seth Yalcin, Karen Bennett, Kent Bach, Matthew Weiner, Jonathan Kvanvig, Eric Swanson, David Chalmers, Agustin Rayo, Dustin Locke, Aaron Bronfman, Michael Allers, Ivan Mayerhofer, and to the participants at the BSPC 2005 for helpful discussion.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andy Egan.

Additional information

Thanks to Brian Weatherson, John Hawthorne, Daniel Stoljar, Frank Jackson, Ben Blumson, Seth Yalcin, Karen Bennett, Kent Bach, Matthew Weiner, Jonathan Kvanvig, Eric Swanson, David Chalmers, Agustin Rayo, Dustin Locke, Aaron Bronfman, Michael Allers, Ivan Mayerhofer, and to the participants at the BSPC 2005 for helpful discussion.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Egan, A. Epistemic modals, relativism and assertion. Philos Stud 133, 1–22 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-006-9003-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-006-9003-x

Keywords

Navigation