期刊文献+

语境主义的分歧丢失难题及其回应

Contextualist Answers to the Problem of Lost Disagreement
收藏 分享 导出
摘要 分歧在当前关于个人口味谓词的语义学争论中扮演着重要角色。一种反语境主义的分歧论证认为,由于无法解释分歧直觉,一种语境主义的语义学是不完备的。这一反对意见得到了很多回应。回应之一是诉诸语义盲点假设对分歧直觉本身进行质疑,但这一回应策略算不得成功。第二个回应始于对分歧蕴含了相冲突的内容这一预设的质疑,进而走向一种分歧概念多样性的理解。通过将口味争论中的分歧理解为一种语境分歧或非信念分歧,一种语境主义的语义学有望能够回应来自分歧的挑战。 Disagreement plays an important role in the recent debates between semantics of taste predicates.An argument from disagreement against contextualism insists that contextualism is inadequate because of its inability to explain the intuition of disagreement.This objection receives multiple answers.The first is to reject the intuition of disagreement by postulating semantic blindness,though it doesn’t succeed.The second answer begins with questions about underlying assumption of disagreement as implying conflicting contents.By resorting to other understandings of disagreement,such as context disagreement and non-doxastic disagreement,it is very possible for contextualism to meet the challenge from disagreement.
作者 王海英 WANG Hai-ying(School of Philosophy and Social Development,Shandong University,Jinan 250100,China)
出处 《自然辩证法研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2019年第6期3-8,共6页 Studies In Dialectics of Nature
关键词 语境主义 分歧 个人口味谓词 语义盲点 非信念态度 contextualism disagreement predicates of personal taste semantic blindness non-doxastic disagreement
作者简介 王海英(1980—),女,浙江台州人,山东大学哲学与社会发展学院博士研究生,主要研究方向:语言哲学、科学哲学。
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献15

  • 1Bach, K. Minding the gap. The Semantica/pragmatics distinction [ A ]. In C. Bianchi ( ed. ). The Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction [ C ]. CSLI Publications, 2004 : 27-43. 被引量:1
  • 2Bach, K. Perspectives on possibilities : Contextualism, relativism, or what? [A]. In A. Egan and B. Weatherson(eds. ). Epistemic Mo- dality[ C ]. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2011 : 19-59. 1-29. 被引量:1
  • 3Dreier, J. Relativism ( and expressivism) and the problem of disagree- ment [ J ]. Philosophical Perspectives, 2009 ( 23 ) : 79-110. 被引量:1
  • 4Glanzberg. M. Context, content, and relativism [ J ]. Philosophical Stttdies, 2007(136) :. 被引量:1
  • 5Klbel, M. The evidence for relativism [ J . Synthese, 2009 ( 166 ) : 375-395. 被引量:1
  • 6Lasersohn, P. Context dependence, disagreement, and predicates of personal taste [ J ]. Linguistics and Philosophy, 2005 (28) : 643-686. 被引量:1
  • 7Lasersohn, P. Relative truth, speaker commitment, and control of im- plicit arguments[J]. Synthese, 2009(166) : 359-374. 被引量:1
  • 8Lopez de Sa, D. The many relativisms: Index, context, and beyond [Z ]. In S. Hales ( ed. ). The Blackwell Companion to Relat&ism [C. New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011 : 102-117. 被引量:1
  • 9MacFarlane, J. Relativism and disagreement [ J ]. Philosophical Stud- ies, 2007(132) : 17-31. 被引量:1
  • 10Mohmann, F. Relative truth and the first persou [ J ]. Philosophical Studies, 2010(150) : 187-220. 被引量:1
投稿分析

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部 意见反馈