Mind and Language 21 (1) (1996)
One of Szabo's central objections is his ‘reservations about the alleged slide from moderate to radical contextualism’. First, some background: the argument Szabo expresses doubt about is essential both to the critical part of our book and to its positive part. Our argument against what we call moderate contextualism depends on the assumption that it collapses into radical contextualism. Our positive view depends on the assumption that for any utterance, we can trigger the intuition that many different propositions are said (this is at the core of our speech act pluralism). So Szabo is attacking one of the key assumptions in IS – if his 'reservations' are well justified, most of what we have to say collapses
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Definite Descriptions Without Uniqueness: A Reply to Abbott. [REVIEW]Zoltán G. Szabó - 2003 - Philosophical Studies 114 (3):279 - 291.
Sententialism and Berkeley's Master Argument.Zoltan Gendler Szabo - 2005 - Philosophical Quarterly 55 (220):462 - 474.
The Excluded Middle: Semantic Minimalism Without Minimal Propositions. [REVIEW]Kent Bach - 2006 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):435–442.
Critical Study of Mark Eli Kalderon (Ed.) Fictionalism in Mataphysics.Zoltán Gendler Szabó - 2011 - Noûs 45 (2):375-385.
Added to index2010-10-26
Total downloads25 ( #205,368 of 2,177,962 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #317,206 of 2,177,962 )
How can I increase my downloads?