David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Perspectives 22 (1):527-544 (2008)
Data about attitude reports provide some of the most interesting arguments for, and against, various theses of semantic relativism. This paper is a short survey of three such arguments. First, I’ll argue (against recent work by von Fintel and Gillies) that relativists can explain the behaviour of relativistic terms in factive attitude reports. Second, I’ll argue (against Glanzberg) that looking at attitude reports suggests that relativists have a more plausible story to tell than contextualists about the division of labour between semantics and meta-semantics. Finally, I’ll offer a new argument for invariantism (i.e. against both relativism and contextualism) about moral terms. The argument will turn on the observation that the behaviour of normative terms in factive and non-factive attitude reports is quite unlike the behaviour of any other plausibly context-sensitive term. Before that, I’ll start with some taxonomy, just so as it’s clear what the intended conclusions below are supposed to be.
|Keywords||philpapers: relativism about truth|
|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
Herman Cappelen (2005). Insensitive Semantics: A Defense of Semantic Minimalism and Speech Act Pluralism. Blackwell Pub..
John MacFarlane (2009). Nonindexical Contextualism. Synthese 166 (2):231--250.
Andy Egan (2007). Epistemic Modals, Relativism and Assertion. Philosophical Studies 133 (1):1--22.
Tamina Stephenson (2007). Judge Dependence, Epistemic Modals, and Predicates of Personal Taste. Linguistics and Philosophy 30 (4):487--525.
Citations of this work BETA
Brian Rabern (2012). Against the Identification of Assertoric Content with Compositional Value. Synthese 189 (1):75-96.
Dilip Ninan (2010). Semantics and the Objects of Assertion. Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (5):355-380.
Peter Baumann (2011). A Puzzle About Responsibility. Erkenntnis 74 (2):207-224.
Similar books and articles
Mikhail Kissine (2012). From Contexts to Circumstances of Evaluation: Is the Trade-Off Always Innocuous? Synthese 184 (2):199-216.
Katinka Quintelier & Daniel Fessler (2012). Varying Versions of Moral Relativism: The Philosophy and Psychology of Normative Relativism. Biology and Philosophy 27 (1):95-113.
Herman Cappelen & John Hawthorne (2009). Relativism and Monadic Truth. Oxford University Press.
Stefano Predelli & Isidora Stojanovic (2008). Semantic Relativism and the Logic of Indexicals. In Manuel García-Carpintero & Max Kölbel (eds.), Relative Truth. Oxford University Press 63--90.
John MacFarlane (2011). Relativism and Knowledge Attributions. In Duncan Pritchard & Sven Bernecker (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Epistemology. Routledge 536--544.
Brian Weatherson (2009). Conditionals and Indexical Relativism. Synthese 166 (2):333-357.
Peter Lasersohn (2011). Context, Relevant Parts and (Lack of) Disagreement Over Taste. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 156 (3):433-439.
Michael Glanzberg (2007). Context, Content, and Relativism. Philosophical Studies 136 (1):1--29.
Ragnar Francén (2010). No Deep Disagreement for New Relativists. Philosophical Studies 151 (1):19--37.
Aaron Z. Zimmerman (2007). Against Relativism. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 133 (3):313-348.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads43 ( #77,402 of 1,725,422 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #81,185 of 1,725,422 )
How can I increase my downloads?