力、内容和统一的多样性

Michael Schmitz
{"title":"力、内容和统一的多样性","authors":"Michael Schmitz","doi":"10.4324/9781003105152-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A strict dichotomy between the force / mode of speech acts and intentional states and their propositional content has been a central feature of analytical philosophy of language and mind since the time of Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell. Recently this dichotomy has been questioned by philosophers such as Peter Hanks (2015, 2016) and Francois Recanati (2016), who argue that we can’t account for propositional unity independently of the forceful acts of speakers and propose new ways of responding to the notorious ‘Frege point’ by appealing to a notion of force cancellation. In my paper I will offer some supplementary criticisms of the traditional view, but also a way of reconceptualizing the force-content distinction which allows us to preserve certain of its features, and an alternative response to the Frege point that rejects the notion of force cancellation in favor of an appeal to intentional acts that create additional forms of unity at higher levels of intentional organization: acts such as questioning a statement or order, or merely putting it forward or entertaining it; pretending to state or order; or conjoining or disjoining statements or orders. This allows us to understand how we can present a forceful act without being committed to it. In contrast, the Frege point confuses a lack of commitment to with a lack of commitment or force in what is put forward.","PeriodicalId":184175,"journal":{"name":"Force, Content and the Unity of the Proposition","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Force, Content and the Varieties of Unity\",\"authors\":\"Michael Schmitz\",\"doi\":\"10.4324/9781003105152-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A strict dichotomy between the force / mode of speech acts and intentional states and their propositional content has been a central feature of analytical philosophy of language and mind since the time of Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell. Recently this dichotomy has been questioned by philosophers such as Peter Hanks (2015, 2016) and Francois Recanati (2016), who argue that we can’t account for propositional unity independently of the forceful acts of speakers and propose new ways of responding to the notorious ‘Frege point’ by appealing to a notion of force cancellation. In my paper I will offer some supplementary criticisms of the traditional view, but also a way of reconceptualizing the force-content distinction which allows us to preserve certain of its features, and an alternative response to the Frege point that rejects the notion of force cancellation in favor of an appeal to intentional acts that create additional forms of unity at higher levels of intentional organization: acts such as questioning a statement or order, or merely putting it forward or entertaining it; pretending to state or order; or conjoining or disjoining statements or orders. This allows us to understand how we can present a forceful act without being committed to it. In contrast, the Frege point confuses a lack of commitment to with a lack of commitment or force in what is put forward.\",\"PeriodicalId\":184175,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Force, Content and the Unity of the Proposition\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Force, Content and the Unity of the Proposition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003105152-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Force, Content and the Unity of the Proposition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003105152-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

自戈特洛布·弗雷格(Gottlob Frege)和伯特兰·罗素(Bertrand Russell)时代以来,言语行为的力/模式与意图状态及其命题内容之间的严格二分法一直是语言和精神分析哲学的核心特征。最近,彼得·汉克斯(2015、2016)和弗朗索瓦·雷卡纳蒂(2016)等哲学家对这种二分法提出了质疑,他们认为,我们不能独立于说话者的有力行为来解释命题的统一性,并提出了通过诉诸力抵消的概念来回应臭名昭著的“弗雷格点”的新方法。在我的论文中,我将提供一些对传统观点的补充批评,但也将提供一种重新概念化力-内容区别的方法,这使我们能够保留其某些特征,并对弗雷格观点的另一种回应,弗雷格观点拒绝力取消的概念,而倾向于呼吁有意行为在有意组织的更高层次上创造额外形式的统一:质疑陈述或命令,或仅仅提出或接受陈述或命令等行为;假装陈述或命令的;或者连接或分离语句或命令。这使我们能够理解如何在没有承诺的情况下表现出强有力的行为。相比之下,弗雷格的观点将缺乏承诺与缺乏承诺或力量相混淆。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Force, Content and the Varieties of Unity
A strict dichotomy between the force / mode of speech acts and intentional states and their propositional content has been a central feature of analytical philosophy of language and mind since the time of Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell. Recently this dichotomy has been questioned by philosophers such as Peter Hanks (2015, 2016) and Francois Recanati (2016), who argue that we can’t account for propositional unity independently of the forceful acts of speakers and propose new ways of responding to the notorious ‘Frege point’ by appealing to a notion of force cancellation. In my paper I will offer some supplementary criticisms of the traditional view, but also a way of reconceptualizing the force-content distinction which allows us to preserve certain of its features, and an alternative response to the Frege point that rejects the notion of force cancellation in favor of an appeal to intentional acts that create additional forms of unity at higher levels of intentional organization: acts such as questioning a statement or order, or merely putting it forward or entertaining it; pretending to state or order; or conjoining or disjoining statements or orders. This allows us to understand how we can present a forceful act without being committed to it. In contrast, the Frege point confuses a lack of commitment to with a lack of commitment or force in what is put forward.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信