Taking 'Might'‐Communication Seriously

Analytic Philosophy 55 (2):176-198 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper, I show that, given seemingly plausible assumptions about the epistemic ‘might’ and conditionals, we cannot explain why in some circumstances it is appropriate to utter conditional ‘might’-sentences, like “If Angelica has crumbs in her pocket, then she might be the thief” and not the corresponding simple ones, like “Angelica might be the thief.” So, one of our assumptions must be incorrect. I argue that the root of the problem is an umbrella thesis about the pragmatics of ‘might’-communication - one that says that the communicative impact of an utterance of a ‘might’-sentence is the performance of a consistency check on the information of the context. I conclude that we must reject this thesis. And I close the paper by sketching an alternative view about what assertive uses of ‘might’-sentences typically do - one which avoids the problem. Such uses typically present a possibility as a serious option in reasoning and deliberation.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,569

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Prolegomena to Digital Communication Ethics.Robert Arnãutu - 2006 - Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 5 (13):23-31.
Author's Response: Culture Matters.R. Palmaru - 2012 - Constructivist Foundations 8 (1):80-82.
Linguistic Communication Versus Understanding.Xinli Wang - 2009 - Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy (Philippine e-journal) 78 (1):71-84.
Towards a Neurocognitive Model of Turn Taking in Multimodal Dialog.James Bonaiuto & K. Thórisson - 2008 - In Ipke Wachsmuth, Manuela Lenzen & Günther Knoblich (eds.), Embodied Communication in Humans and Machines. Oxford University Press. pp. 451--483.
Diversity and Communication in Feminist Theory.Gaile Pohlhaus - 2001 - Social Philosophy Today 17:153-162.
How Is Communication Possible?Hsin-I. Liu - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 6:51-56.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-15

Downloads
77 (#155,817)

6 months
2 (#278,494)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Benjamin Lennertz
Colgate University

Citations of this work

Assertion and Modality.Fabrizio Cariani - 2020 - In Sanford Goldberg (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Assertion. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 505-528.
Simple Contextualism About Epistemic Modals Is Incorrect.Benjamin Lennertz - 2014 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 3 (4):252-262.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Studies in the Way of Words.Herbert Paul Grice - 1989 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Cambridge University Press.
Epistemic Modals.Seth Yalcin - 2007 - Mind 116 (464):983-1026.
Assertion.Robert Stalnaker - 1978 - Syntax and Semantics (New York Academic Press) 9:315-332.

View all 42 references / Add more references