David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 162 (3):625-635 (2013)
In “Epistemic Modals,” Seth Yalcin argues that what explains the deficiency of sentences containing epistemic modals of the form ‘p and it might be that not-p’ is that sentences of this sort are strictly contradictory, and thus are not instances of a Moore-paradox as has been previous suggested. Benjamin Schnieder, however, argues in his Yalcin’s explanation of these sentences’ deficiency turns out to be insufficiently general, as it cannot account for less complex but still defective sentences, such as ‘Suppose it might be raining.’ Consequently, Schnieder proposes his own, expressivist treatment of epistemic modals which he thinks can explain the deficiency of both the original sentence type as well as more complex cases of embedded sentences containing epistemic modals. In this study, I argue that although Schnieder is right to draw our attention to the explanatory failure of Yalcin’s account, we aren’t forced to adopt Schnieder’s expressivist account of epistemic modals. I defend instead a contextualist-friendly alternative which explains the deficiencies of all the relevant sentence types, while avoiding both the defects of Yalcin’s account and the intuitive costs of expressivism
|Keywords||Philosophy of language Epistemic modals Supposition Expressivism Contextualism Moore paradoxes|
|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
Kent Bach (2009). Perspectives on Possibilities: Contextualism, Relativism, or What? In Andy Egan & B. Weatherson (eds.), Epistemic Modality. Oxford University Press.
David Barnett (2006). Zif is If. Mind 115 (459):519-566.
Michael A. E. Dummett (1978). Truth and Other Enigmas. Harvard University Press.
Dorothy Edgington (1995). On Conditionals. Mind 104 (414):235-329.
P. L. Heath & Willard Van Orman Quine (1955). Methods of Logic. Philosophical Quarterly 5 (21):376.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Benjamin Schnieder (2010). Expressivism Concerning Epistemic Modals. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (240):601-615.
Moritz Schulz (2010). Epistemic Modals and Informational Consequence. Synthese 174 (3):385 - 395.
Seth Yalcin (2009). More on Epistemic Modals. Mind 118 (471):785-793.
Charity Anderson (2014). Fallibilism and the Flexibility of Epistemic Modals. Philosophical Studies 167 (3):597-606.
Cian Dorr & John Hawthorne (2013). Embedding Epistemic Modals. Mind 122 (488):867-914.
Andy Egan, John Hawthorne & Brian Weatherson (2005). Epistemic Modals in Context. In G. Preyer & G. Peter (eds.), Contextualism in Philosophy. Oxford University Press. 131-170.
Mark Schroeder (forthcoming). Hard Cases for Combining Expressivism and Deflationist Truth: Conditionals and Epistemic Modals. In Steven Gross & Michael Williams (eds.), (unknown). Oxford.
Janice Dowell, J. L. (2011). A Flexible Contextualist Account of Epistemic Modals. Philosophers' Imprint 11 (14):1-25.
Tamina Stephenson (2007). Judge Dependence, Epistemic Modals, and Predicates of Personal Taste. Linguistics and Philosophy 30 (4):487--525.
Moritz Schulz (2010). Wondering What Might Be. Philosophical Studies 149 (3):367 - 386.
Kai von Fintel & Sabine Iatridou (2003). Epistemic Containment. Linguistic Inquiry 34:173-98.
Malte Willer (2011). Realizing What Might Be. Philosophical Studies 153 (3):365 - 375.
Roy Sorensen (2009). Meta-Agnosticism: Higher Order Epistemic Possibility. Mind 118 (471):777-784.
Seth Yalcin (2010). Probability Operators. Philosophy Compass 5 (11):916-37.
Added to index2011-08-12
Total downloads85 ( #22,474 of 1,696,507 )
Recent downloads (6 months)13 ( #43,510 of 1,696,507 )
How can I increase my downloads?