David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 189 (1):199-219 (2012)
It is a widely held view in philosophy that propositions perform a plethora of different theoretical roles. Amongst other things, they are believed to be the semantic values of sentences in contexts, the objects of attitudes, the contents of illocutionary acts, and the referents of that-clauses. This assumption is often combined with the claim that propositions have their truth-values eternally. In this paper I aim to show that these two assumptions are incompatible: propositions cannot both fulfill the mentioned roles and be eternally true or false. Following Kaplan and Lewis’s Operator Argument, I argue that compositional semantic values of sentences in contexts do not correspond to eternal propositions. Thus, either we regard the non-eternal entities that in fact realize the semantic role of propositions as also fulfilling the remaining propositional roles, or we abandon the assumption that there is a unique realizer of all the roles. The Operator Argument has recently come under attack, mainly for its tense-logical assumptions. However, rejecting these assumptions is not a sufficient defense of the compatibility of the two claims, since the extensional alternative to the tense-logical framework does not allow us to universally retain eternal propositions as compositional semantic values of sentences either.
|Keywords||Propositions Semantic values Eternalism Temporalism Operator Argument Compositionality Sententiality|
|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
Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard K. Wettstein (eds.) (1989). Themes From Kaplan. Oxford University Press, Usa.
Noam Chomsky (1995). The Minimalist Program. The MIT Press.
Jeffrey C. King (2007). The Nature and Structure of Content. Oxford University Press.
Herman Cappelen & John Hawthorne (2009). Relativism and Monadic Truth. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Brian Rabern (2012). Against the Identification of Assertoric Content with Compositional Value. Synthese 189 (1):75-96.
Similar books and articles
Brian Rabern (2012). Propositions and Multiple Indexing. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 1 (2):116-124.
David Ripley (2012). Structures and Circumstances: Two Ways to Fine-Grain Propositions. Synthese 189 (1):97 - 118.
Lorenz B. Puntel (2000). ''What Does '... Is True' ('It Is True That...') Express? The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 2000:131-141.
Mark Balaguer (1998). Attitudes Without Propositions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 58 (4):805-26.
Kent Bach (2006). The Excluded Middle: Semantic Minimalism Without Minimal Propositions. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):435–442.
Kent Bach (2009). Perspectives on Possibilities: Contextualism, Relativism, or What? In Andy Egan & B. Weatherson (eds.), Epistemic Modality. Oxford University Press
Kevin C. Klement (2004). Propositional Logic. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Marek Nowak & Daniel Vanderveken (1995). A Complete Minimal Logic of the Propositional Contents of Thought. Studia Logica 54 (3):391 - 410.
Ferenc Huoranszki (2002). Fate, Freedom and Contingency. Acta Analytica 17 (1):79-102.
Stephen Schiffer (2012). Propositions, What Are They Good For? In Richard Schantz (ed.), Prospects for Meaning (Current Issues in Theoretical Philosophy, Vol. 3). Walter de Gruyter
Added to index2011-08-07
Total downloads311 ( #8,137 of 1,913,505 )
Recent downloads (6 months)91 ( #2,658 of 1,913,505 )
How can I increase my downloads?