14 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Brian Ball [13]Brian A. Ball [1]
See also:
Profile: Brian Ball (Oxford University)
  1. Brian Ball (forthcoming). Deriving the Norm of Assertion in Advance. Journal of Philosophical Research.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Brian Ball (forthcoming). Response to Hindriks and Kooi in Advance. Journal of Philosophical Research.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Brian Ball (2014). Deriving the Norm of Assertion. Journal of Philosophical Research 39:75-85.
    Frank Hindriks has attempted to derive a variant of Timothy Williamson’s knowledge rule for assertion on the basis of a more fundamental belief expression analysis of that speech act. I show that his attempted derivation involves a crucial equivocation between two senses of ‘must,’ and therefore fails. I suggest two possible repairs; but I argue that even if they are successful, we should prefer Williamson’s fully general knowledge rule to Hindriks’s restricted moral norm.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Brian Ball (2014). Forms of Thought, by E. J. Lowe. Mind 123 (492):1205-1208.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Brian Ball (2014). Response to Hindriks and Kooi. Journal of Philosophical Research 39:93-99.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Brian Ball (2014). Speech Acts: Natural or Normative Kinds? The Case of Assertion. Mind and Language 29 (3):336-350.
    There are two views of the essences of speech acts: according to one view, they are natural kinds; according to the other, they are what I call normative kinds—kinds in the (possibly non-reductive) definition of which some normative term occurs. In this article I show that speech acts can be normative but also natural kinds by deriving Williamson's account of assertion, on which it is an act individuated, and constitutively governed, by a norm (the knowledge rule), from a consideration of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Brian Ball (2014). The Knowledge Rule and the Action Rule. Southern Journal of Philosophy 52 (4):552-574.
    In this paper I compare Timothy Williamson's knowledge rule of assertion with Ishani Maitra and Brian Weatherson's action rule. The paper is in two parts. In the first part I present and respond to Maitra and Weatherson's master argument against the knowledge rule. I argue that while its second premise, to the effect that an action X can be the thing to do though one is in no position to know that it is, is true, its first premise is not: (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Brian Ball (2013). The Tarskian Turn. Edited by Leon Horsten. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011. Pp. Xii + 165. Price £24.95.). [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 63 (252):629-632.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Brian Ball & Michael Blome-Tillmann (2013). Indexical Reliabilism and the New Evil Demon. Erkenntnis 78 (6):1317-1336.
    Stewart Cohen’s New Evil Demon argument raises familiar and widely discussed concerns for reliabilist accounts of epistemic justification. A now standard response to this argument, initiated by Alvin Goldman and Ernest Sosa, involves distinguishing different notions of justification. Juan Comesaña has recently and prominently claimed that his Indexical Reliabilism (IR) offers a novel solution in this tradition. We argue, however, that Comesaña’s proposal suffers serious difficulties from the perspective of the philosophy of language. More specifically, we show that the two (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Brian Ball (2011). What is Meaning? (Review). Canadian Journal of Philosophy 41 (4):485-503.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Brian Ball (2010). What Is Semantic Content? In Erich Rast & Luiz Carlos Baptista (eds.), Meaning and Context. Peter Lang. 2--187.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Brian Ball (2010). Relativism and Monadic Truth. [REVIEW] Logical Analysis and History of Philosophy 13.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Brian Ball & Michael Blome-Tillmann (201). Counter Closure and Knowledge Despite Falsehood. Philosophical Quarterly 64 (257):552-568.
    Certain puzzling cases have been discussed in the literature recently which appear to support the thought that knowledge can be obtained by way of deduction from a falsehood; moreover, these cases put pressure, prima facie, on the thesis of counter closure for knowledge. We argue that the cases do not involve knowledge from falsehood; despite appearances, the false beliefs in the cases in question are causally, and therefore epistemologically, incidental, and knowledge is achieved despite falsehood. We also show that the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Brian A. Ball, Dorothy Edgington & John Hawthorne, Semantics, Meta-Semantics, and Ontology: A Critique of the Method of Truth in Metaphysics.
    In this thesis, Semantics, Meta-Semantics, and Ontology, I provide a critique of the method of truth in metaphysics. Davidson has suggested that we can determine the metaphysical nature and structure of reality through semantic investigations. By contrast, I argue that it is not semantics, but meta-semantics, which reveals the metaphysically necessary and sufficient truth conditions of our claims. As a consequence I reject the Quinean criterion of ontological commitment. In Part I, chapter 1, I argue that the metaphysically primary truth (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation