1. bookVolumen 5 (2013): Heft 37 (November 2013)
Zeitschriftendaten
License
Format
Zeitschrift
eISSN
2182-2875
Erstveröffentlichung
16 Apr 2017
Erscheinungsweise
4 Hefte pro Jahr
Sprachen
Englisch
access type Uneingeschränkter Zugang

A Puzzle about Disagreement

Online veröffentlicht: 31 Dec 2018
Volumen & Heft: Volumen 5 (2013) - Heft 37 (November 2013)
Seitenbereich: 283 - 297
Eingereicht: 16 Feb 2013
Akzeptiert: 03 Jul 2013
Zeitschriftendaten
License
Format
Zeitschrift
eISSN
2182-2875
Erstveröffentlichung
16 Apr 2017
Erscheinungsweise
4 Hefte pro Jahr
Sprachen
Englisch
Abstract

A well-known (roughly Fregean) strategy for dealing with Kripke’s 1979 Pierre-puzzle is to appeal to differing senses or modes of presentation in the characterization of Pierre’s beliefs. However, differing senses or modes of presentation in the characterization of an agent’s beliefs conceal, in this context, another equally challenging puzzle about disagreement. Apparently therefore, theorists are required to pay attention to both sorts of puzzles in order to offer a satisfactory solution to the Pierre case.

Chalmers, David. 2011. Propositions and attitude ascriptions: a Fregean account. Noûs 45: 595-639.10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00788.xSearch in Google Scholar

Crimmins, Mark. 1992. Talk about Beliefs. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Feldman, Richard. 2006. Epistemological puzzles about disagreement. In Epistemology Futures, ed. by Stephen Hetherington, 216-236. New York: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Feldman, Richard and Warfield, Ted A. (eds.). 2010. Disagreement. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226078.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Fine, Kit. 2007. Semantic Relationism. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470690826Search in Google Scholar

Forbes, Graeme. 1987. A dichotomy sustained. Philosophical Studies 51: 187-211.10.1007/BF00353647Search in Google Scholar

Frege, Gottlob. 1980. Philosophical and Mathematical Correspondence. Edited by Gottfried Gabriel, Hans Hermes, Friedrich Kambartel, Christian Thiel, Albert Veraart and Brian McGuinness and translated by Hans Kaal. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Goldstein, Laurence. 2009. Pierre and circumspection in belief-formation. Analysis 69: 653-55.10.1093/analys/anp092Search in Google Scholar

Heck, Richard. 1995. The sense of communication. Mind 104: 79-106.10.1093/mind/104.413.79DOI öffnenSearch in Google Scholar

Kripke, Saul. 1979. A puzzle about belief. In Meaning and Use, ed. by Avishai Margalit, 239-83. Dordrecht: Reidel.10.1007/978-1-4020-4104-4_20Search in Google Scholar

MacFarlane, John. 2007. Relativism and disagreement. Philosophical Studies 132: 17-31.10.1007/s11098-006-9049-9Search in Google Scholar

Richard, Mark. 1990. Propositional Attitudes: An Essay on Thoughts and How We Ascribe Them. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511625282Search in Google Scholar

Richard, Mark. 2011. Relativistic content and disagreement. Philosophical Studies 156: 421-31.10.1007/s11098-010-9687-9Search in Google Scholar

Ridge, Mike. 2013. Disagreement. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86: 41-63.10.1111/j.1933-1592.2011.00551.xDOI öffnenSearch in Google Scholar

Salmon, Nathan. 1986. Frege’s Puzzle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Schiffer, Stephen. 1992. Belief ascription. Journal of Philosophy 89: 499-521.10.2307/2941005Search in Google Scholar

Sosa, David. 1996. The import of the puzzle about belief. Philosophical Review 105: 373-402.10.2307/2185705Search in Google Scholar

Sundell, Timothy. 2011. Disagreements about taste. Philosophical Studies 155: 267-288.10.1007/s11098-010-9572-6Search in Google Scholar

Zalta, Edward. 1988. Intensional Logic and the Metaphysics of Intentionality. Cambridge, MA: MIT/Bradford.Search in Google Scholar

Zalta, Edward. 1989. Singular propositions, abstract constituents, and propositional attitudes. In Themes from Kaplan, ed. by Joseph Almog, John Perry, and Howard Wettstein, 455-78. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Empfohlene Artikel von Trend MD

Planen Sie Ihre Fernkonferenz mit Scienceendo