David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ratio 16 (1):1–15 (2003)
Defenders of the prosentential theory of truth claim that the English language contains prosentences which function analogously to their better known cousins – pronouns. Statements such as ‘That is true’ or ‘It is true’, they claim, inherit their content from antecedent statements, just as pronouns inherit their reference from antecedent singular terms. Prosentential theorists claim that the content of these prosentences is exhausted by the content of their antecedents. They then use the notion of the inheritance of content from an antecedent to explain the various functions of the predicate ‘. . . is true’. Defenders of the prosentential theory of truth are mistaken, I claim, in thinking that in order to oppose the view that ‘. . . is true’ is used to ascribe a substantive truth property to propositions they need to claim that no uses of ‘. . . is true’ ever attribute any property. I identify an ‘attributive’ use of prosentences in which reliability is implicitly attributed to a subject. I then use the capacity of prosentences to serve as implicit attributions of reliability as a basis for explicating the logical structure of explicit attributions of reliability. The identification of an attributive use of prosentences does not constitute a fundamental change in the prosentential theory.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Jon Barwise & Robin Cooper (1981). Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language. Linguistics and Philosophy 4 (2):159--219.
Nuel D. Belnap Jr (1973). Restricted Quantification and Conditional Assertion. In Hugues Leblanc (ed.), Truth, Syntax and Modality. Amsterdam,North-Holland.
Robert Brandom (2000). Articulating Reasons: An Introduction to Inferentialism. Harvard University Press.
Robert B. Brandom (1994). Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment. Harvard University Press.
Marian David (1994). Correspondence and Disquotation: An Essay on the Nature of Truth. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Maciej Witek (2005). Truth and Conversation. Philosophica 75:103-135.
Harry Ide (1992). Chrysippus's Response to Diodorus's Master Argument. History and Philosophy of Logic 13 (2):133-148.
Paolo Casalegno (2005). Truth and Truthfulness Attributions. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 105 (3):295–320.
Alberto Vanzo (2010). Kant on the Nominal Definition of Truth. Kant-Studien 101 (2):147-166.
Dorit Bar-On & Keith Simmons (2007). The Use of Force Against Deflationism: Assertion and Truth. In Dirk Greimann & Geo Siegwart (eds.), Truth and Speech Acts: Studies in the Philosophy of Language. Routledge. 61--89.
Bradley Dowden, Truth. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Dorothy Grover (1979). Prosentences and Propositional Quantification: A Response to Zimmerman. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 35 (3):289 - 297.
Diego Marconi (2006). On the Mind Dependence of Truth. Erkenntnis 65 (3):301 - 318.
Arvid Båve (2009). Why is a Truth-Predicate Like a Pronoun? Philosophical Studies 145 (2):297 - 310.
James R. Beebe, Prosentential Theory of Truth. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads8 ( #167,561 of 1,098,129 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #172,576 of 1,098,129 )
How can I increase my downloads?