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 124 (2):175-191 (2000)
A speaker often decides whether or not to saysomething based on his assessment of the impact itwould have on his hearer's beliefs. If he thinks itwould bring them more in line with the truth, he saysit; otherwise he does not. In this paper, I developa model of these judgments, focusing specifically onthose of vague sentences. Under the simplifyingassumption that an utterance only conveys a speaker'sapplicability judgments, I present a Bayesian model ofan utterance's impact on a hearer's beliefs. Fromthis model I derive a model of a speaker's judgment ofwhether or not an utterance would be informative. Iillustrate it with several examples of judgments ofvague and non-vague sentences. For instance, I showthat it models the common judgment that assertingeither ``George is tall'' or ``George is not tall'' wouldbe misleading if George were borderline tall, butasserting ``George is tall and he isn't tall'' would notbe.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy Epistemology Logic Metaphysics Philosophy of Language|
|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
Sam Alxatib & Francis Jeffry Pelletier (2011). The Psychology of Vagueness: Borderline Cases and Contradictions. Mind and Language 26 (3):287-326.
Daniel Lassiter & Noah D. Goodman (forthcoming). Adjectival Vagueness in a Bayesian Model of Interpretation. Synthese:1-36.
Jonathan Lawry (2008). Appropriateness Measures: An Uncertainty Model for Vague Concepts. Synthese 161 (2):255-269.
Similar books and articles
Christopher Gauker (2001). Situated Inference Versus Conversational Implicature. Noûs 35 (2):163–189.
Peter van Inwagen (2002). Why Vagueness is a Mystery. Acta Analytica 17 (1):11 - 17.
Peter Inwagen (2002). Why Vagueness is a Mystery. Acta Analytica 17 (2):11-17.
Nicholas J. J. Smith (2008). Why Sense Cannot Be Made of Vague Identity. Noûs 42 (1):1–16.
Diana Raffman (2005). Borderline Cases and Bivalence. Philosophical Review 114 (1):1-31.
Stewart Shapiro (2006). Vagueness in Context. Oxford University Press.
Peter Verdée & Stephan der Waart van Gulivank (2008). A Generic Framework for Adaptive Vague Logics. Studia Logica 90 (3):385 - 405.
Karlis Podnieks (2012). Freges Puzzle From a Model-Based Point of View. The Reasoner 6 (1):5--6.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads36 ( #133,495 of 1,924,715 )
Recent downloads (6 months)18 ( #33,682 of 1,924,715 )
How can I increase my downloads?