排序方式: 共有3条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1
1.
Fred J. Kauffeld 《Argumentation》2009,23(2):239-257
The pragmatics underlying Paul Grice’s analysis of utterance-meaning provide a powerful framework for investigating the commitments
arguers undertake. Unfortunately, the complexity of Grice’s analysis has frustrated appropriate reliance on this important
facet of his work. By explicating Cicero’s use of apostrophe in his famous “First Catilinarian” this essay attempts to show
that a full complex of reflexive gricean speaker intentions in essentially to seriously saying and meaning something.
相似文献
Fred J. KauffeldEmail: |
2.
Olav Gjelsvik 《Inquiry (Oslo, Norway)》2017,60(3):295-314
AbstractCappelen and Dever have recently defended the view that indexicals are not essential: They do not signify anything philosophically deep and we do not need indexicals for any important philosophical work. This paper contests their view from the point of view of an account of intentional agency. It argues that we need indexicals essentially when accounting for what it is do something intentionally and, as a consequence, intentional action, and defends a view of intentional action as a possible conclusion of practical reasoning where the indexical is essential for the content of such a conclusion. 相似文献
3.
Benjamin Schnieder 《Synthese》2008,162(1):101-115
The Conjunction Principle says, roughly, that if the truth of a conjunction can be brought about, then the truth of each conjunct can be brought about.
The current essay argues that this principle is not valid. After a clarification of the principle, it is shown how a proper
understanding of the involved notions falsify the principle. As a corollary, a recent attack on van Inwagen’s Consequence Argument will be rebutted, because it relies on the invalid conjunction principle. 相似文献
1