Is ‘No’ a Force-Indicator? Yes, Sooner or Later!

Logica Universalis 11 (2):225-251 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
This paper discusses the philosophical and logical motivations for rejectivism, primarily by considering a dialogical approach to logic, which is formalized in a Question–Answer Semantics. We develop a generalized account of rejectivism through close consideration of Mark Textor's arguments against rejectivism that the negative expression ‘No’ is never used as an act of rejection and is equivalent with a negative sentence. In doing so, we also shed light upon well-known issues regarding the supposed non-embeddability and non-iterability of force indicators.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
SCHINA-3
Revision history
Archival date: 2019-03-09
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Yes and No.Rumfitt, I.
The Logical Basis of Metaphysics.Dummett, Michael; Putnam, Hilary & Conant, James
Rejection.Smiley, Timothy

View all 22 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2017-05-20

Total views
18 ( #35,299 of 38,022 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #30,142 of 38,022 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.