新意义的反对：对Nicolò D'Agruma的回复。

IF 2.4 2区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL

Cognitive Science Pub Date : 2025-01-25 DOI:10.1111/cogs.70036

Michael Devitt, Nicolas Porot

{"title":"新意义的反对：对Nicolò D'Agruma的回复。","authors":"Michael Devitt, Nicolas Porot","doi":"10.1111/cogs.70036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In our paper, “The reference of proper names” (2018), we raised and rebutted the “New-Meaning” objection to our methodology. Our rebuttal rested on theoretical considerations and experimental results. In “Do the Gödel vignettes involve a new descriptivist meaning?”, Nicolò D'Agruma provides an interesting argument against our theoretical considerations (but does not address the experimental evidence). Our present paper argues against D'Agruma. So, our original rebuttal of the objection still stands. We offer further evidence against the objection.</p>","PeriodicalId":48349,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Science","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The New-Meaning Objection: A Reply to Nicolò D'Agruma\",\"authors\":\"Michael Devitt, Nicolas Porot\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cogs.70036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In our paper, “The reference of proper names” (2018), we raised and rebutted the “New-Meaning” objection to our methodology. Our rebuttal rested on theoretical considerations and experimental results. In “Do the Gödel vignettes involve a new descriptivist meaning?”, Nicolò D'Agruma provides an interesting argument against our theoretical considerations (but does not address the experimental evidence). Our present paper argues against D'Agruma. So, our original rebuttal of the objection still stands. We offer further evidence against the objection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48349,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Science\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cogs.70036\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cogs.70036","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

在我们的论文《专名的引用》（2018）中，我们提出并反驳了对我们方法论的“新意义”异议。我们的反驳基于理论考虑和实验结果。在“Gödel小插曲是否涉及新的描述主义意义？”中，Nicolò D'Agruma提供了一个有趣的论点，反对我们的理论考虑（但没有解决实验证据）。我们的论文反对达格鲁马。所以，我们最初对反对意见的反驳仍然有效。我们对反对意见提出进一步的证据。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The New-Meaning Objection: A Reply to Nicolò D'Agruma

In our paper, “The reference of proper names” (2018), we raised and rebutted the “New-Meaning” objection to our methodology. Our rebuttal rested on theoretical considerations and experimental results. In “Do the Gödel vignettes involve a new descriptivist meaning?”, Nicolò D'Agruma provides an interesting argument against our theoretical considerations (but does not address the experimental evidence). Our present paper argues against D'Agruma. So, our original rebuttal of the objection still stands. We offer further evidence against the objection.

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

Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-

CiteScore

4.10

自引率

8.00%

发文量

139

期刊介绍： Cognitive Science publishes articles in all areas of cognitive science, covering such topics as knowledge representation, inference, memory processes, learning, problem solving, planning, perception, natural language understanding, connectionism, brain theory, motor control, intentional systems, and other areas of interdisciplinary concern. Highest priority is given to research reports that are specifically written for a multidisciplinary audience. The audience is primarily researchers in cognitive science and its associated fields, including anthropologists, education researchers, psychologists, philosophers, linguists, computer scientists, neuroscientists, and roboticists.