Testing for Assertion

M. Montminy
{"title":"Testing for Assertion","authors":"M. Montminy","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190675233.013.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How can we tell whether someone has made an assertion? In many cases, the answer is obvious. But often, it is not. In this chapter, the author argues that a theory-independent test for assertion is not possible. This means that as theoreticians, we have some freedom regarding our answer to the question. This freedom is not unlimited, though. Intuitions about clear cases should be respected, and the answer should be shown to be theoretically fruitful. The author defends the view that an assertion is the expression of belief. In the last section, this view is applied to utterances made in controversial philosophical settings.","PeriodicalId":310780,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Assertion","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Oxford Handbook of Assertion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190675233.013.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

How can we tell whether someone has made an assertion? In many cases, the answer is obvious. But often, it is not. In this chapter, the author argues that a theory-independent test for assertion is not possible. This means that as theoreticians, we have some freedom regarding our answer to the question. This freedom is not unlimited, though. Intuitions about clear cases should be respected, and the answer should be shown to be theoretically fruitful. The author defends the view that an assertion is the expression of belief. In the last section, this view is applied to utterances made in controversial philosophical settings.
断言测试
我们如何判断某人是否做出了断言?在许多情况下,答案显而易见。但通常,它不是。在本章中,作者认为不可能有独立于理论的断言检验。这意味着,作为理论家,我们对这个问题的答案有一定的自由。然而,这种自由并不是无限的。关于明确案例的直觉应该得到尊重,答案应该在理论上是富有成效的。作者为断言是信念的表达这一观点进行了辩护。在最后一节中,这一观点被应用于有争议的哲学背景下的话语。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书