File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190675233.013.6
Supplementary
-
Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Book Chapter: Assertion: A Defective Theoretical Category
Title | Assertion: A Defective Theoretical Category |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Assertion Norms Commitments Causes Cappelen |
Issue Date | 2020 |
Publisher | Oxford University Press. |
Citation | Assertion: A Defective Theoretical Category. In Goldberg, SC (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Assertion, p. 139-156. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2020 How to Cite? |
Abstract | This chapter defends the view that research about language and communication should not appeal to anything that falls under the label “assertion.” According to the No-Assertion view (Cappelen 2011), what philosophers have tried to capture by the term “assertion” is largely a philosopher’s invention. It fails to pick out an act type that we engage in, and it is not a category we need in order to explain any important component of our linguistic practice. The phenomena that theories of assertion aim to explain are better accounted for by appeal to the notion of what is said. Sayings are governed by variable norms, come with variable commitments, and have variable causes and effects. This chapter outlines the No-Assertion view, presents some of the core arguments in favor of it, and responds to some criticisms. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/290387 |
ISBN | |
Series/Report no. | Oxford Handbooks |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Cappelen, Herman | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-10-27T03:34:41Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-10-27T03:34:41Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Assertion: A Defective Theoretical Category. In Goldberg, SC (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Assertion, p. 139-156. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2020 | - |
dc.identifier.isbn | 9780190675233 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/290387 | - |
dc.description.abstract | This chapter defends the view that research about language and communication should not appeal to anything that falls under the label “assertion.” According to the No-Assertion view (Cappelen 2011), what philosophers have tried to capture by the term “assertion” is largely a philosopher’s invention. It fails to pick out an act type that we engage in, and it is not a category we need in order to explain any important component of our linguistic practice. The phenomena that theories of assertion aim to explain are better accounted for by appeal to the notion of what is said. Sayings are governed by variable norms, come with variable commitments, and have variable causes and effects. This chapter outlines the No-Assertion view, presents some of the core arguments in favor of it, and responds to some criticisms. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | Oxford University Press. | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | The Oxford Handbook of Assertion | - |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Oxford Handbooks | - |
dc.subject | Assertion | - |
dc.subject | Norms | - |
dc.subject | Commitments | - |
dc.subject | Causes | - |
dc.subject | Cappelen | - |
dc.title | Assertion: A Defective Theoretical Category | - |
dc.type | Book_Chapter | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190675233.013.6 | - |
dc.identifier.hkuros | 326957 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 139 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 156 | - |
dc.publisher.place | New York, NY | - |