David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy 76 (1):55-75 (2001)
Despite some talk of ‘erotetic logic’ and ‘the logic of interrogatives’, logicians have hitherto completely overlooked the peculiar logical form of questions, also shared by interrogative clauses generally. Of relevance to an understanding of time are those interrogative clauses that are janus-like: sometimes raising a question, sometimes answering it—which can then no longer arise. Since a closed question can no longer arise, it might seem that simply the passing of time turns an open into a closed question. Instead, the passing of time itself can be understood as the closing or resolution of open questions, of the determination of what is not fixed but as yet in question.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Stephen Harris (1994). Gts and Interrogative Tableaux. Synthese 99 (3):329 - 343.
Douglas Walton (1999). The Fallacy of Many Questions: On the Notions of Complexity, Loadedness and Unfair Entrapment in Interrogative Theory. [REVIEW] Argumentation 13 (4):379-383.
Tomoyo Takagi (1999). "Questions" in Argument Sequences in Japanese. Human Studies 22 (2/4):397 - 423.
Joseph Diekemper (2005). Logical Determinateness, Fixity, and the Symmetry of Time. Philosophical Papers 34 (1):1-24.
Michael Dummett (2003). How Should We Conceive of Time? Philosophy 78 (3):387-396.
Jaakko Hintikka & Stephen Harris (1988). On the Logic of Interrogative Inquiry. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:233 - 240.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads11 ( #110,981 of 1,004,644 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,617 of 1,004,644 )
How can I increase my downloads?