The coherence of contextualism: A reply to Cappelen & Lepore
|Abstract||Cappelen and Lepore (2005) begin their critique of contextualism with an anecdote about an exercise they do with their undergraduate students (who I take it are meant to be naïve subjects whose linguistic intuitions have not been contaminated by mistaken philosophical theories). The test is to ask students to categorize types of expressions. Students quickly get the hang of the idea that referring expressions (like indexicals and pronouns) belong to a single category. They’re then asked whether they think that common nouns like ‘penguin’ or adjectives like ‘red’ belong to this category, and of course students are reluctant to see any similarity here. Students are then told that, as incredible as it may seem, there are philosophers (called contextualists) who think that the indexical ‘I’ and the common noun ‘penguin’ belong to the same category and who think that these types of expressions are context-sensitive in just the same way|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Marga Reimer (1998). What is Meant by 'What is Said'? A Reply to Cappelen and Lepore. Mind and Language 13 (4):598–604.
Kent Bach (2006). The Excluded Middle: Semantic Minimalism Without Minimal Propositions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):435–442.
Jonathan Cohen & Samuel C. Rickless (2007). Binding Arguments and Hidden Variables. Analysis 67 (1):65–71.
Ernie Lepore (2010). Saying and Agreeing. Mind and Language 25 (5):583-601.
Anne Bezuidenhout (2006). The Coherence of Contextualism. Mind and Language 21 (1):1–10.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads60 ( #16,332 of 556,772 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,754 of 556,772 )
How can I increase my downloads?