Radical anti‐disquotationalism

Philosophical Perspectives 32 (1):41-107 (2018)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
A number of `no-proposition' approaches to the liar paradox find themselves implicitly committed to a moderate disquotational principle: the principle that if an utterance of the sentence `$P$' says anything at all, it says that $P$ (with suitable restrictions). I show that this principle alone is responsible for the revenge paradoxes that plague this view. I instead propose a view in which there are several closely related language-world relations playing the `semantic expressing' role, none of which is more central to semantic theorizing than any other. I use this thesis about language and the negative result about disquotation to motivate the view that people do say things with utterances of paradoxical sentences, although they do not say the proposition you'd always expect, as articulated with a disquotational principle.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2021-09-13
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
47 ( #55,143 of 2,446,231 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
7 ( #54,540 of 2,446,231 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.