Moore’s Paradox and Essential Indexicality

Abstract

The aim of this paper is that to argue that Moore's paradox demonstrates the essential indexical, challenging Cappelen and Dever’s perspective (Cappelen and Dever 2013) that denies the philosophical significance of the first-person by rejecting that there is an essential indexical. They believe that the well-known cases of the essential indexical, such as Perry’s messy shopper, do not reveal essential indexicality, since each of these cases has a Frege counterpart that is essentially the same, with the only difference being substitution failures involving third-person expressions instead of indexical expressions. However, this paper points out that Moore's paradox arises only when an agent refers to oneself using an indexical expression, asserting something like “P, but I do not believe P.” Therefore, contrary to Cappelen and Dever’s perspective, there is no corresponding Frege counterpart to Moore's paradox.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

The Essential Indexicality of Intentional Action.Matthew Babb - 2016 - Philosophical Quarterly 66 (264):439-457.
The Inessential Indexical: On the Philosophical Insignificance of Perspective and the First Person.Herman Cappelen & Josh Dever - 2013 - Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. Edited by Josh Dever.
Impersonal Intentions.Daniel Morgan - 2018 - Philosophical Quarterly 68 (271):376-384.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-09-26

Downloads
121 (#40,924)

6 months
1 (#1,912,481)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Woomin Park
Seoul National University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references