Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Studies 150 (2):187-220. (2010)
|Abstract||In recent work on contextdependency, it has been argued that certain types of sentences give rise to a notion of relative truth. In particular, sentences containing predicates of personal taste and moral or aesthetic evaluation as well as epistemic modals are held to express a proposition (relative to a context of use) which is true or false not only relative to a world of evaluation, but other parameters as well, such as standards of taste or knowledge or an agent. Thus, a sentence like chocolate tastes good would express a proposition p that is true or false not only at a world of evaluation, but relative to the additional parameter as well, such as a parameter of taste or an agent. I will argue that the sentences that apparently give rise to relative truth should be understood by relating them in a certain way to the first person. More precisely, such sentences express what I will call firstpersonbased genericity, a form of generalization that is based on or directed toward an essential firstperson application of the predicate. The account differs from standard relative truth account in crucial respects: it is not the truth of the proposition expressed that is relative to the first person; the proposition expressed by a sentence with a predicate of taste rather has absolute truth conditions. Instead it is the propositional content itself that requires a firstpersonal cognitive access whenever it is entertained. This account, I will argue, avoids a range of problems that standard relative truth theories of the sentences in question face and explains a number of further peculiarities that such sentences display|
|Keywords||relative truth first person generic 'one' predicates of taste|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Friederike Moltmann (2012). Two Kinds of First-Person-Oriented Content. Synthese 184 (2):157 - 177.
Isidora Stojanovic (2007). Talking About Taste: Disagreement, Implicit Arguments, and Relative Truth. [REVIEW] Linguistics and Philosophy 30 (6):691-706.
Donald Davidson (1994). What is Quine's View of Truth? Inquiry 37 (4):437 – 440.
Michael Glanzberg (2011). More on Operators and Tense. [REVIEW] Analysis 71 (1):112 - 123.
Kent Bach (2009). Perspectives on Possibilities: Contextualism, Relativism, or What? In Andy Egan & B. Weatherson (eds.), Epistemic Modality. Oxford University Press.
Alexander Jackson (2010). The Inflexibility of Relative Truth. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 110 (3pt3):409-418.
Scott Soames (2011). True At. [REVIEW] Analysis 71 (1):124 - 133.
Alexandre Billon (2011). My Own Truth ---Pathologies of Self-Reference and Relative Truth. In Rahman Shahid, Primiero Giuseppe & Marion Mathieu (eds.), Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science, Vol. 23. springer.
Peter Lasersohn (2005). Context Dependence, Disagreement, and Predicates of Personal Taste. Linguistics and Philosophy 28 (6):643--686.
Christopher Gauker (2006). Against Stepping Back: A Critique of Contextualist Approaches to the Semantic Paradoxes. [REVIEW] Journal of Philosophical Logic 35 (4):393 - 422.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads93 ( #9,066 of 722,940 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #26,098 of 722,940 )
How can I increase my downloads?