David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 146 (2):249 - 267 (2009)
Russellianism is characterized as the view that ‘that’-clauses refer to Russellian propositions, familiar set-theoretic pairings of objects and properties. Two belief-reporting sentences, S and S*, possessing the same Russellian content, but differing in their intuitive truthvalue, are provided. It is argued that no Russellian explanation of the difference in apparent truthvalue is available, with the upshot that the Russellian fails to explain how a speaker who asserts S but rejects S* can be innocent of inconsistency, either in what she says or, at least, in what she implicates. Yet, while there is no semantic or pragmatic explanation of the substitution failure consistent with Russellianism, there remains the possibility of a purely psychological explanation that is, nonetheless, Russellian. This is an attractive option. It comes at a cost, however, since, in abandoning the project of providing a semantic or pragmatic explanation of anti-substitutivity intuitions, the Russellian is no longer in the business of explaining how a rational, well-informed speaker, with no incentive to mislead, can avoid inconsistency in reporting the facts as they appear.
|Keywords||Russellianism ‘That’-clause Pragmatic strategy Hidden-indexical theory Naive theory Mode of presentation Guise Implicature Enrichment|
|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 (1997). Do Belief Reports Report Beliefs? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (3):215-241.
David M. Braun (1998). Understanding Belief Reports. Philosophical Review 107 (4):555-595.
Mark Crimmins (2002). Talk About Beliefs. MIT Press.
Mark Crimmins & John Perry (1989). The Prince and the Phone Booth: Reporting Puzzling Beliefs. Journal of Philosophy 86 (12):685 - 711.
Mitchell S. Green (1998). Direct Reference and Implicature. Philosophical Studies 91 (1):61-90.
Citations of this work BETA
Philip Atkins (2013). A Pragmatic Solution to Ostertag's Puzzle. Philosophical Studies 163 (2):359-365.
Similar books and articles
Stephen Schiffer (2005). Russell's Theory of Definite Descriptions. Mind 114 (456):1135-1183.
Pierdaniele Giaretta (2009). The Paradox of Knowability From a Russellian Perspective. Prolegomena 8 (2):141-158.
Richard G. Heck, Jr (2012). Solving Frege's Puzzle. Journal of Philosophy 109 (1-2):132-174.
Marian David (2009). Defending Existentialism? In M. Reicher (ed.), States of Affairs. Ontos Verlag. 167--209.
Brad J. Thompson (2006). Color Constancy and Russellian Representationalism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (1):75-94.
Brad J. Thompson (2008). Representationalism and the Conceivability of Inverted Spectra. Synthese 160 (2):203-213.
Francesco Pupa (2010). On the Russellian Reformation. Philosophical Studies 147 (2):247 - 271.
Jan Almäng (2012). Russellian Propositions and Properties. Metaphysica 13 (1):7-25.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads53 ( #33,979 of 1,139,978 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #48,755 of 1,139,978 )
How can I increase my downloads?