David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy 53 (204):264 - 269 (1978)
Mr B. H. Slater distinguishes between various pairs of questions: 1 Did they agree either that they would go to the pictures or that they would go out for a meal? 1 Did they agree that either they would go to the pictures or they would go out for a meal? 2 Is it known either that Jones was guilty or that Smith was guilty? 2 Is it known that either Jones was guilty or Smith was guilty? 3 Did he say either that he would get the puzzle solved or that he would eat his hat? 3 Did he say that either he would get the puzzle solved or he would eat his hat? According to Slater, if we can only say ‘Yes’ to 1 or 3), then we immediately know what was agreed, namely, that either they would go to the pictures or they would go out for a meal; but if we can just say ‘Yes’ to 1 or 3), then we cannot immediately say what was agreed; all we know is that either they agreed to go to the pictures or they agreed to go out for a meal. Or, generalizing somewhat, a ‘Yes’ answer to the question ‘Did they agree that either p or q?’ tells us that they agreed that either p or q; but, with the question ‘Did they agree either that p or that q?’, while ‘Yes, they agreed that p’, and ‘Yes they agreed that q’ are possible answers , there is no answer, ‘Yes they agreed that r’, which is invariably correct, when ‘Yes’ is correct. In particular, the answer certainly cannot be ‘Yes, they agreed that p or q’
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Andrzej W. Jankowski (1985). Disjunctions in Closure Spaces. Studia Logica 44 (1):11 - 24.
David Harrah (1961). A Logic of Questions and Answers. Philosophy of Science 28 (1):40-46.
Ira A. Noveck, Gennaro Chierchia, Florelle Chevaux, Raphaelle Guelminger & Emmanuel Sylvestre (2002). Linguistic-Pragmatic Factors in Interpreting Disjunctions. Thinking and Reasoning 8 (4):297 – 326.
Mary R. Newsome & P. N. Johnson-Laird (2006). How Falsity Dispels Fallacies. Thinking and Reasoning 12 (2):214 – 234.
David Braybrooke (2003). Toward an Alliance Between the Issue-Processing Approach and Pragma-Dialectical Analysis. Argumentation 17 (4):513-535.
Alexander Miller (2000). Disjunctions, Programming, and the Australian View of Colour. Analysis 60 (266):209-212.
Frank Jackson (1998). Colour, Disjunctions, Programming. Analysis 58 (2):86-88.
Robert K. Meyer (1972). On Relevantly Derivable Disjunctions. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 13 (4):476-480.
Tomasz Furmanowski (1983). The Logic of Algebraic Rules as a Generalization of Equational Logic. Studia Logica 42 (2-3):251 - 257.
Carlos Santamaria & P. N. Johnson-Laird (2000). An Antidote to Illusory Inferences. Thinking and Reasoning 6 (4):313 – 333.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads10 ( #314,268 of 1,790,069 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #426,086 of 1,790,069 )
How can I increase my downloads?