Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to present and discuss a puzzle involving accommodation. The puzzle is based on three assumptions. The first assumption is that accommodation takes place after an utterance. The second assumption is that accommodation can make a difference to the truth-value of an utterance even if the utterance is not about the future. The third assumption is that something that takes place after an utterance cannot make a difference to the truth-value of the utterance unless the utterance is about the future. Since these assumptions are jointly inconsistent, one of them must be false. The question is which one we ought to reject. The majority of the discussion is devoted to discussing each of the options, and the tentative conclusion is that the most plausible strategy is to reject the third thesis. That amounts to saying that something that takes place after an utterance can make a difference to the truth-value of the utterance even if the utterance is not about the future.

Highlights

  • It is widely agreed that the truth of an utterance can depend on features of the situation in which the utterance is made

  • While the first option leads to a form of relativism, the second option leads to a form of temporal externalism

  • There is a position that deserves special mention. While he is not responding to the puzzle that we have presented, Richard (1995, pp. 565–566) allows that accommodation can make a difference to the truth-value of an utterance even if the utterance is not about the future

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It is widely agreed that the truth of an utterance can depend on features of the situation in which the utterance is made. The puzzle starts from the assumption that nothing that happens after an utterance can make a difference to the truth-value of the utterance unless the utterance is about the future This conflicts with two plausible assumptions about accommodation. 284) argues that an utterance of ‘‘I have to pick up my cat’’ is appropriate only if it is presupposed in the conversation that the speaker owns a cat If this is not presupposed prior to the utterance, the presupposition can be brought into place by means of accommodation. 5, we argue that the most promising strategies for resolving the puzzle involve giving up the assumption that nothing that happens after an utterance can make a difference to the truth-value of the utterance unless the utterance is about the future and discuss two ways of developing this strategy. Since the considerations that could push us one way or another go well beyond issues of accommodation, this paper does not aim to resolve the question of which view is to be preferred

The puzzle
Rejecting the first thesis
Rejecting the third thesis
Making a difference to truth-value but not content
Making a difference to content
Two contexts
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.