Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment.Robert Brandom - 1994 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
    What would something unlike us--a chimpanzee, say, or a computer--have to be able to do to qualify as a possible knower, like us? To answer this question at the very heart of our sense of ourselves, philosophers have long focused on intentionality and have looked to language as a key to this condition. Making It Explicit is an investigation into the nature of language--the social practices that distinguish us as rational, logical creatures--that revises the very terms of this inquiry. Where (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1051 citations  
  • Studies in the way of words.Herbert Paul Grice - 1989 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   990 citations  
  • Assessment Sensitivity: Relative Truth and its Applications.John MacFarlane - 2014 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    John MacFarlane explores how we might make sense of the idea that truth is relative. He provides new, satisfying accounts of parts of our thought and talk that have resisted traditional methods of analysis, including what we mean when we talk about what is tasty, what we know, what will happen, what might be the case, and what we ought to do.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   448 citations  
  • A Natural History of Negation.Laurence R. Horn - 1989 - University of Chicago Press.
    This book offers a unique synthesis of past and current work on the structure, meaning, and use of negation and negative expressions, a topic that has engaged thinkers from Aristotle and the Buddha to Freud and Chomsky. Horn's masterful study melds a review of scholarship in philosophy, psychology, and linguistics with original research, providing a full picture of negation in natural language and thought; this new edition adds a comprehensive preface and bibliography, surveying research since the book's original publication.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   386 citations  
  • Making it Explicit.Isaac Levi & Robert B. Brandom - 1994 - Journal of Philosophy 93 (3):145.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1013 citations  
  • Epistemic Modals.Seth Yalcin - 2007 - Mind 116 (464):983-1026.
    Epistemic modal operators give rise to something very like, but also very unlike, Moore's paradox. I set out the puzzling phenomena, explain why a standard relational semantics for these operators cannot handle them, and recommend an alternative semantics. A pragmatics appropriate to the semantics is developed and interactions between the semantics, the pragmatics, and the definition of consequence are investigated. The semantics is then extended to probability operators. Some problems and prospects for probabilistic representations of content and context are explored.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   391 citations  
  • Philosophical Papers Volume I.David Kellogg Lewis - 1983 - New York, US: Oup Usa.
    The first volume of this series presents fifteen selected papers dealing with a variety of topics in ontology, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of language.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   161 citations  
  • A Natural History of Negation.Laurence R. Horn - 1989 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 24 (2):164-168.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   348 citations  
  • The non-identity of a material thing and its matter.Kit Fine - 2003 - Mind 112 (446):195-234.
    There is a well-known argument from Leibniz's Law for the view that coincident material things may be distinct. For given that they differ in their properties, then how can they be the same? However, many philosophers have suggested that this apparent difference in properties is the product of a linguistic illusion; there is just one thing out there, but different sorts or guises under which it may be described. I attempt to show that this ‘opacity’ defence has intolerable consequences for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   199 citations  
  • Composition, colocation, and metaontology.Karen Bennett - 2009 - In Ryan Wasserman, David Manley & David Chalmers, Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. pp. 38.
    The paper is an extended discussion of what I call the ‘dismissive attitude’ towards metaphysical questions. It has three parts. In the first part, I distinguish three quite different versions of dismissivism. I also argue that there is little reason to think that any of these positions is correct about the discipline of metaphysics as a whole; it is entirely possible that some metaphysical disputes should be dismissed and others should not be. Doing metametaphysics properly requires doing metaphysics first. I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   152 citations  
  • What Is Assertion.John MacFarlane - 2011 - In Jessica Brown & Herman Cappelen, Assertion: New Philosophical Essays. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
    To assert something is to perform a certain kind of act. This act is different in kind both from other speech acts, like questions, requests, commands, promises, and apologies, and from acts that are not speech acts, like toast buttering and inarticulate yodeling. My question, then is this: what features of an act qualify it as an assertion, and not one of these other kinds of act? To focus on a particular example: in uttering “Bill will close the window,” one (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   126 citations  
  • Philosophical Papers.Graeme Forbes & David Lewis - 1985 - Philosophical Review 94 (1):108.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   220 citations  
  • (1 other version)On semantics.James Higginbotham - 1985 - Linguistic Inquiry 16:547--593.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   146 citations  
  • (1 other version)Philosophical Papers, Volume I.David K. Lewis - 1985 - Journal of Philosophy 82 (1):42-45.
    This is the second volume of philosophical essays by one of the most innovative and influential philosophers now writing in English. Containing thirteen papers in all, the book includes both new essays and previously published papers, some of them with extensive new postscripts reflecting Lewis's current thinking. The papers in Volume II focus on causation and several other closely related topics, including counterfactual and indicative conditionals, the direction of time, subjective and objective probability, causation, explanation, perception, free will, and rational (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   95 citations  
  • (1 other version)On Semantics.James Higginbotham - 1987 - In Ernest LePore, New directions in semantics. Orlando: Academic Press. pp. 1--54.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   74 citations  
  • The limits to debate: a revised theory of semantic presupposition.Noel Burton-Roberts - 1989 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Exponents and critics of semantic presupposition have almost invariably based their discussion on the ('Standard') definition of presupposition implied by Frege and Strawson. In this study Noel Burton-Roberts argues convincingly against this definition, that leads it to a three-valued semantics. He presents a very simple semantic definition which is weaker, more general and leads to a semantics more easily interpreted as two-valued with gaps. The author shows that a wide range of intuitive facts that eluded the Standard definition follow directly (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  • Metalinguistic negation and echoic use.Robyn Carston - unknown
    What I hope to achieve in this paper is some rather deeper understanding of the semantic and pragmatic properties of utterances which are said to involve the phenomenon of metalinguistic negation[FN1]. According to Laurence Horn, who has been primarily responsible for drawing our attention to it, this is a special non-truthfunctional use of the negation operator, which can be glossed as 'I object to U' where U is a linguistic utterance. This is to be distinguished from descriptive truthfunctional negation which (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   38 citations  
  • Interrogatives: Questions, facts and dialogue.Jonathan Ginzburg - 1996 - In Shalom Lappin, The handbook of contemporary semantic theory. Cambridge, Mass., USA: Blackwell Reference.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   38 citations  
  • The Identity of a Material Thing and its Matter.Mahrad Almotahari - 2014 - Philosophical Quarterly 64 (256):387-406.
    I have both a smaller and a larger aim. The smaller aim is polemical. Kit Fine believes that a material thing—a Romanesque statue, for example, or an open door—can be distinguished from its constituent matter—a piece of alloy, say, or a hunk of plastic—without recourse to modal or temporal considerations. The statue is Romanesque; the piece of alloy is not Romanesque. The door is open; the hunk of plastic is not open. I argue that these considerations, when combined with a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Arguing for non-identity: A response to King and Frances.Kit Fine - 2006 - Mind 115 (460):1059-1082.
    I defend my paper ‘The Non-identity of a Material Thing and Its Matter’ against objections from Bryan Frances and Jeffrey King.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • Metalinguistic negation and metaphysical affirmation.Mahrad Almotahari - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 167 (3):497-517.
    In a series of articles, Kit Fine presents some highly compelling objections to monism, the doctrine that spatially coincident objects are identical. His objections rely on Leibniz’s Law and linguistic environments that appear to be immune to the standard charge of non-transparency and substitution failure. In this paper, I respond to Fine’s objections on behalf of the monist. Following Benjamin Schnieder, I observe that arguments from Leibniz’s Law are valid only if they involve descriptive, rather than metalinguistic, negation. Then I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations