Argumenta – Journal of Analytic Philosophy

 

Non-Persistent Truths [Target Article]

Issue: Issue 17 • Author/s: Andrea Bonomi
Topics: Epistemology, Metaphysics, Ontology, Philosophical logic, Philosophy of language, Theoretical philosophy

I start from Evans’ criticism of temporalism, based on the claim that it does not “provide for the stable evaluation of utterances”. I try to show that, with suitable qualifications, assuming the possibility of evaluations yielding different truth-values at different times is not an “eccentric” move (as suggested by Evans). I briefly consider Prior’s metaphysical arguments in favour of the asymmetry between past and future and I suggest that, independently of these arguments, there are linguistic reasons in support of such an assumption. In particular, there are some future-oriented statements…

Future Contingents, Open Futurism, and Ontic Indeterminacy [Critical Discussion]

Issue: Issue 17 • Author/s: Giuseppe Spolaore
Topics: Epistemology, Metaphysics, Modal Logic, Philosophical logic, Philosophy of language, Theoretical philosophy

This paper critically discusses Patrick Todd’s book, The Open Future: Why Future Contingents Are All False (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021).

Non-Persistent Truths and Alethic Charity [Critical Note]

Issue: Issue 18 • Author/s: Peter Ludlow
Topics: Epistemology, Metaphysics, Philosophy of language, Theoretical philosophy

In his fascinating paper on non-persistent truths, Andrea Bonomi makes the case that the truth value of propositions may shift over time, and he takes issue with Gareth Evans’ criticism of such a view. Some of the linguistic evidence provided by Bonomi may strike philosophers as suspect, but I build a case for the legitimacy of such evidence under a principle that I call “alethic charity,” which governs folk truth attributions. I also speculate that some of Bonomi’s judgments may reflect the hidden presence of epistemic modality.

Non-Persistent Truths? [Critical Note]

Issue: Issue 18 • Author/s: Ernesto Napoli
Topics: Epistemology, Metaphysics, Philosophical logic, Philosophy of language, Theoretical philosophy

I argue that the semantic route to the revisability of the future indicated by Bonomi disappoints the expectations. Bonomi makes a lot of a confessed peculiar use of ‘no longer’. The use is indeed peculiar, not to say out of the question. Any statement of “The F is no longer G” is about a change in a subject. Bonomi sets up a scenario in which there is a change of subject and the new subject does not have the property that the old subject had. A scenario in which a…

Floating, Anchored and Future-Tensed Propositions [Critical Note]

Issue: Issue 18 • Author/s: Francesco Orilia
Topics: Epistemology, Metaphysics, Philosophical logic, Philosophy of language, Theoretical philosophy

There are two prominent theses in Bonomi’s 2023 paper “Non-Persistent Truths”, here labelled the two-levels and the changing background theses. According to the former, both semantic eternalism and temporalism are right, in that our ordinary natural language utterances may be taken to express both anchored propositions with a fixed truth value and floating propositions with a changing truth value. According to the changing background thesis, there are future-tensed propositions that change truth value, for reasons that have to do with change in background information available to ordinary speakers, rather than…

Between Gareth Evans and Bill Evans: Andrea Bonomi’s Multi-Propositionalism [Critical Note]

Issue: Issue 18 • Author/s: Carlo Penco
Topics: Metaphysics, Philosophical logic, Philosophy of language, Philosophy of Time, Theoretical philosophy

Evans claims that a sentence should always be considered correct or incorrect at the time of its utterance, to preserve what is called the “stability principle”. To introduce the debate, I refer to some remarks by Kamangar and Perry, who show how Frege could have treated future contingents in a way that would contrast Evans’ claim. I then discuss the more traditional contrast between Frege and Prior on different conceptions of propositions that lies at the core of Evans’ view, and I show how Dummett seems to find a compromise…

Is Psychologism Unavoidable in a Phenomenologically Adequate Account of Mental Content? [Special Issue]

Issue: Issue 18 • Author/s: Elisabetta Sacchi
Topics: Epistemology, Metaphysics, Philosophy of language, Philosophy of mind, Theoretical philosophy

In my paper I focus on psychologism in the theory of mental content and critically consider a variety of it—“intentional psychologism” (Pitt 2009)—that has recently entered the stage in the philosophy of mind literature. My aim is twofold. First, I want to provide a critical evaluation of this new variety of psychologism, considering in particular whether it is immune from (some of) the most famous classical criticisms. Secondly, I want to provide a diagnosis of what ultimately motivates the current revival of the “psychologistic attitude”. My aim in so doing…

Is Intentionality a Relation? A Dialogue [Special Issue]

Issue: Issue 18 • Author/s: David Bourget, Angela Mendelovici
Topics: Cognitive science, Epistemology, Metaphysics, Philosophy of language, Philosophy of mind, Theoretical philosophy

This dialogue explores the question of whether intentionality––the “ofness”, “aboutness”, or “directedness” of mental states––is a relation. We explore three views: the Naive View, on which intentionality is a relation to ordinary, everyday objects, facts, and other such items; the Abstract Contents View, on which intentionality is a relation to mind-independent abstract entities; and the Aspect View, on which intentionality is a matter of having intentional states with particular (non-relational) aspects that are our contents. We consider the challenges facing these views, which include empirical challenges in accounting for all…

Undermining Defeat and Propositional Justification [Special Issue]

Issue: Issue 02 • Author/s: Giacomo Melis
Topics: Epistemology, Philosophy of language, Philosophy of mind

I extend the Higher-Order View of Undermining Defeat (HOVUD) defended in Melis (2014) to account for the defeat of propositional justification. In doing so, I also clarify the important notion of higher-order commitment, and I make some considerations concerning the defeat of externalist epistemic warrants.

The Ludic Background of Constitutive Rules in Bernard Suits [Special Issue]

Issue: Issue 07 • Author/s: Filip Kobiela
Topics: History of Analytic Philosophy, Philosophy of language, Theoretical philosophy

The main purpose of the paper is to present and discuss Bernard Suits’ account of constitutive rules presented in his opus magnum—The Grasshopper. Games, Life and Utopia—and in several minor contributions, which supplement or modify his original position. This account will be regarded as a crucial part of Suits’ theory of ludic activities, mainly game-playing. The stress will be put on peculiarities of constitutive rules—their relation to ends in games, players’ attitudes and their limitative nature. The analysis of the consequences of breaking a rule in different types of actions…
1 4 5 6 7 8