Quotational and other opaque belief reports

IF 0.6 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Wayne A. Davis
{"title":"Quotational and other opaque belief reports","authors":"Wayne A. Davis","doi":"10.1111/phib.12239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In a novel move against Russellianism, Heck (2014) has argued that reports of the form <i>S believes that p</i> are semantically opaque on the grounds that there are no other means in English to report psychologically individuated beliefs, such as those Lois Lane reports using the names ‘Superman’ and ‘Clark Kent.’ I show that there are several other ways to meet this need. I focus on quotational reports of the form <i>S believes “p</i>,<i>”</i> which philosophers have overlooked or mischaracterized. I argue that reports of this form are no more metalinguistic than those using the complementizer <i>that</i>. In both, the meaning of the report depends on the meaning, not the form, of the complement. Some distinguishing features of non-metalinguistic quotational reports are that their complements force “deictic shift” and have no transparent interpretation. Free direct speech and thought bubbles have the same properties. The “q-ascriptions” McCullagh (2017a) proposed to defend Russellianism against Heck are not in common use and on his account are unsuitably metalinguistic. The fact that quotational belief reports are opaque without being metalinguistic makes the Russellian thesis that the meaning of a name is its referent untenable, thereby undermining Russellianism about belief reports.</p>","PeriodicalId":45646,"journal":{"name":"Analytic Philosophy","volume":"63 4","pages":"213-231"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/phib.12239","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytic Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/phib.12239","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In a novel move against Russellianism, Heck (2014) has argued that reports of the form S believes that p are semantically opaque on the grounds that there are no other means in English to report psychologically individuated beliefs, such as those Lois Lane reports using the names ‘Superman’ and ‘Clark Kent.’ I show that there are several other ways to meet this need. I focus on quotational reports of the form S believes “p, which philosophers have overlooked or mischaracterized. I argue that reports of this form are no more metalinguistic than those using the complementizer that. In both, the meaning of the report depends on the meaning, not the form, of the complement. Some distinguishing features of non-metalinguistic quotational reports are that their complements force “deictic shift” and have no transparent interpretation. Free direct speech and thought bubbles have the same properties. The “q-ascriptions” McCullagh (2017a) proposed to defend Russellianism against Heck are not in common use and on his account are unsuitably metalinguistic. The fact that quotational belief reports are opaque without being metalinguistic makes the Russellian thesis that the meaning of a name is its referent untenable, thereby undermining Russellianism about belief reports.

引用和其他不透明的信念报告
在反对罗素主义的一项新颖举措中,赫克(2014)认为,形式S的报告认为p在语义上是不透明的,因为在英语中没有其他方法来报告心理个性化的信念,比如Lois Lane使用“超人”和“克拉克·肯特”的那些报告。我指出,还有其他几种方法可以满足这种需求。我关注的是S相信“p”这种形式的引用报告,这是哲学家们忽视或错误描述的。我认为这种形式的报道并不比那些使用that补语的报道更具元语言性。在这两种情况下,报告的意义取决于补语的意义,而不是形式。非元语言引语的一个显著特征是它们的补语强迫“指示转换”,没有透明的解释。自由的直接言论和思想泡沫具有相同的特性。McCullagh (2017a)提出的捍卫Russellianism反对Heck的“q-ascriptions”并不常用,而且在他看来是不合适的元语言。引文式的信念报告是不透明的,而不是元语言的,这一事实使得罗素式的“名字的意义就是它的指称物”的论点站不住脚,从而削弱了罗素式的信念报告理论。
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
Analytic Philosophy
Analytic Philosophy PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信