David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 145 (3):363 - 375 (2009)
In recent years, speech-act theory has mooted the possibility that one utterance can signify a number of different things. This pluralist conception of signification lies at the heart of Thomas Bradwardine’s solution to the insolubles, logical puzzles such as the semantic paradoxes, presented in Oxford in the early 1320s. His leading assumption was that signification is closed under consequence, that is, that a proposition signifies everything which follows from what it signifies. Then any proposition signifying its own falsity, he showed, also signifies its own truth and so, since it signifies things which cannot both obtain, it is simply false. Bradwardine himself, and his contemporaries, did not elaborate this pluralist theory, or say much in its defence. It can be shown to accord closely, however, with the prevailing conception of logical consequence in England in the fourteenth century. Recent pluralist theories of signification, such as Grice’s, also endorse Bradwardine’s closure postulate as a plausible constraint on signification, and so his analysis of the semantic paradoxes is seen to be both well-grounded and plausible.
|Keywords||Bradwardine Grice Insolubles Paradox Logical consequence Theory of signification Meaning Pluralism|
|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
J. L. Austin (1975). How to Do Things with Words. Clarendon Press.
John Boler (2003). Ockham on the Concept. Medieval Philosophy and Theology 11 (1):65-86.
Herman Cappelen (2005). Insensitive Semantics: A Defense of Semantic Minimalism and Speech Act Pluralism. Blackwell Pub..
Hartry Field (2006). Truth and the Unprovability of Consistency. Mind 115 (459):567 - 605.
Citations of this work BETA
Ian Rumfitt (2014). I—Truth and Meaning. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 88 (1):21-55.
Similar books and articles
Catarina Dutilh Novaes (2009). Lessons on Sentential Meaning From Mediaeval Solutions to the Liar Paradox. Philosophical Quarterly 59 (237):682-704.
Laurent Cesalli & Nadja Germann (2008). Signification and Truth Epistemology at the Crossroads of Semantics and Ontology in Augustine's Early Philosophical Writings. Vivarium 46 (2):123-154.
Simon Evnine, ''Every Proposition Asserts Itself to Be True'': A Buridanian Solution to the Liar Paradox?
Stewart Duncan (2011). Hobbes, Signification, and Insignificant Names. Hobbes Studies 24 (2):158-178.
Catarina Dutilh Novaes & Stephen Read (2008). Insolubilia and the Fallacy Secundum Quid Et Simpliciter. Vivarium 46 (2):175-191.
Terence Parsons (2001). Bhartrhari on What Cannot Be Said. Philosophy East and West 51 (4):525-534.
Fabrizio Amerini (2011). Pragmatics and Semantics in Thomas Aquinas. Vivarium 49 (1-3):95-126.
Catarina Dutilh Novaes (2011). Lessons on Truth From Mediaeval Solutions to the Liar Paradox. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (242):58-78.
Stephen Read (2010). Field's Paradox and Its Medieval Solution. History and Philosophy of Logic 31 (2):161-176.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads34 ( #90,929 of 1,707,715 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #88,568 of 1,707,715 )
How can I increase my downloads?