Truth and assertion: rules vs aims

Analysis 78 (4):638–648 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There is a fundamental disagreement about which norm regulates assertion. Proponents of factive accounts argue that only true propositions are assertable, whereas proponents of non-factive accounts insist that at least some false propositions are. Puzzlingly, both views are supported by equally plausible (but apparently incompatible) linguistic data. This paper delineates an alternative solution: to understand truth as the aim of assertion, and pair this view with a non-factive rule. The resulting account is able to explain all the relevant linguistic data, and finds independent support from general considerations about the differences between rules and aims.

Author's Profile

Neri Marsili
Universitat de Barcelona

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-01-26

Downloads
540 (#15,152)

6 months
51 (#19,644)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?