Shifty Speech and Independent Thought

Author(s):  
Mona Simion

This is an essay in epistemology and the philosophy of language. It concerns epistemology in that it is a manifesto for epistemic independence: the independence of good thinking from practical considerations. It concerns philosophy of language in that it defends a functionalist account of the normativity of assertion in conjunction with an integrated view of the normativity of constative speech acts. The book defends the independence of thought from the most prominent threat that has surfaced in the last twenty years of epistemological theorizing: the phenomenon of shiftiness of proper assertoric speech with practical context. It does four things: first, it shows that, against orthodoxy, the argument from practical shiftiness of proper assertoric speech against the independence of proper thought from the practical does not go through, for it rests on normative ambiguation. Second, it defends a proper functionalist knowledge account of the epistemic normativity of assertion, in conjunction with classical invariantism about knowledge attributions. Third, it generalizes this account to all constative speech. Last, it defends detailed normative accounts for conjecturing, telling, and moral assertion.

Author(s):  
Mona Simion

This chapter is up to an ambitious task: it develops the first integrated account of the epistemic normativity of constatives. In order to do that, it argues for a generalized knowledge-based account of the epistemic normativity of constative speech, and it develops the corresponding accounts for, respectively, assertives, predictives, retrodictives, descriptives, ascriptives, informatives, confirmatives, concessives, retractives, assentives, dissentives, disputatives, responsives, suggestives, and suppositives. The chapter argues for a knowledge account from three different angles: (1) the nature of communicative speech acts, (2) the relation between assertion and other constatives, and (3) the normativity of belief together with constatives’ epistemic function.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
AZHAR

Tindak tutur adalah salah satu analisis pragmatik yang mengkaji bahasa dengan aspek pemakaian aktualnya. Tindak tutur pertama kali dikenalkan oleh Austin pada tahun 1965, yang merupakan teori yang dihasilkan dari studinya. Kemudian teori ini dikembangkan oleh Searle (1969) dengan menerbitkan sebuah buku Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Ia berpendapat bahwa komunikasi bukan sekadar lambang, kata atau kalimat, tetapi akan lebih tepat apabila disebut produk atau hasil dari lambang, kata atau kalimat yang berwujud perilaku tindak tutur (the performance of speech acts).Leech (1994: 4) menyatakan bahwa sebenarnya dalam tindak tutur mempertimbangkan lima aspek situasi tutur yang mencakup: penutur dan mitra tutur, konteks tuturan, tujuan tuturan, tindak tutur sebagai sebuah tindakan/aktivitas dan tuturan sebagai produk tindak verbal.


Author(s):  
Paul Johannesson

There are several different views of the role of information systems. Two of the most important are the data view and the communicative view. According to the data view, the primary purpose of an information system is to provide a model of a domain, thereby enabling people to obtain information about reality by studying the model. In this respect, an information system works as a repository of data that reflects the structure and behaviour of an enterprise, and the system provides data that can be used for decisions about the enterprise. In contrast, the communicative view states that the major role of an information system is to support communication within and between organisations by structuring and coordinating the actions performed by organisational agents. The system is seen as a medium through which people can perform social actions, such as stating facts, making promises, and giving orders. The data and communicative views of information systems are mirrored by two different views of organisations: the functional view and the constructional view (Dietz, 2003a). The functional view focuses on the functions of an organisation with respect to its environment, in particular, the resources that the organisation consumes and produces. A model of an organisation from a functional perspective is a black-box model, as it shows the interactions with the environment but not the internal mechanisms. The constructional view, on the other hand, focuses on how behaviour and function are brought about by the operations and structure of an organisation. A model of an organisation from a constructional perspective is a white-box model as it shows the inner workings of the organisation. In information systems design, the starting point has often been based on the data view and the functional view, though frequently augmented by concepts like reasoning and monitoring. However, these views easily lead to a computerand technology-biased management of the communication taking place in an organisation, and they benefit from being complemented by the communicative and constructional views. A promising theoretical foundation for these views is the language/action approach, which is based on theories from linguistics and the philosophy of language. In the language/action approach, business actions are modelled on the notions of speech acts and discourses, which provide a basis for distinguishing between different communication phases, such as preparation, negotiation, and acceptance. The purpose of this chapter is to outline how the language/action approach can be used as a basis for the information modelling of communicative aspects in organisations.


Author(s):  
Joshua Rust

John Rogers Searle (born July 31, 1932) is the Slusser Professor of Philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley. This analytic philosopher has made major contributions to the fields of the philosophy of mind, the philosophy of language, and social ontology. He is best known for his Chinese room argument, which aims to demonstrate that the formally described systems of computer functionalism cannot give rise to intentional understanding. Searle’s early work focused on the philosophy of language, where, in Speech Acts (1969), he explores the hypothesis that speaking a language is a rule-governed form of behavior. Just as one must follow certain rules in order to be considered to be playing chess, rules determine whether a speaker is making a promise, giving a command, asking a question, making a statement, and so forth. The kind of speech act that an utterance is depends on, among other conditions, its propositional content and illocutionary force. The content depicts the world as being a certain way, and the force specifies what a speaker is trying to do with that content. For example, for an utterance to qualify as a promise a speaker must describe a future act (content) and intend that the utterance place him or herself under an obligation to do that act (force). In Intentionality (1983), Searle argues that the structure of language not only mirrors but is derivative of the structure of intentional thought, so that core elements of his analysis of speech acts can be used as the basis for a theory of intentionality. Just as we can only promise by bringing certain propositional contents under a certain illocutionary force, intentional states such as belief, desire, fear, and joy can only be about the world in virtue of a representative content and a psychological mode. A theory of intentionality does not explain how intentionality is possible, given the basic facts of the world as identified by the natural sciences. Much of Searle’s work in the philosophy of mind, as found in Minds, Brains, and Science (1984) and The Rediscovery of the Mind (1992), is dedicated to the question of how mental facts, including but not limited to intentional facts, can be reconciled with basic, natural facts. Searle’s Chinese room argument is formulated in the service of rejecting computer functionalism, a prominent attempt at such reconciliation. Searle’s positive view, which he describes as "biological naturalism," is that mental facts are both caused by and features of underlying neurophysiological processes. In Speech Acts (1969), Searle claims that using language is akin to playing chess, in that both activities are made possible by participants following what he describes as "constitutive rules," rules that must be followed in order for someone to be considered to be undertaking those activities. Other institutional facts, such as money or the U.S. presidency, are also created and maintained in virtue of our following certain constitutive rules. For example, someone can only count as a U.S. president if that person is, among other conditions, a U.S. citizen who receives a majority of electoral votes. This thought is extended and explored in Searle’s two book-length contributions to the field of social ontology, The Construction of Social Reality (1995) and Making the Social World (2010). In addition to the philosophy of language and social ontology, Searle has made book-length contributions to the philosophy of action (Rationality in Action (2001)) and the philosophy of perception (Seeing Things as They Are: A Theory of Perception (2015)). He also famously engaged Jacques Derrida’s critique of J. L. Austin’s discussion of illocutionary acts ("Reiterating the Differences: A Reply to Derrida" (1977)). Searle has summarized his various positions in Mind, Language, and Society: Philosophy in the Real World (1998) and Mind: A Brief Introduction (2004).


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-20
Author(s):  
Robin McKenna

Keith DeRose’s new book The Appearance of Ignorance is a welcome companion volume to his 2009 book The Case for Contextualism. Where latter focused on contextualism as a view in the philosophy of language, the former focuses on how contextualism contributes to our understanding of (and solution to) some perennial epistemological problems, with the skeptical problem being the main focus of six of the seven chapters. DeRose’s view is that a solution to the skeptical problem must do two things. First, it must explain how it is that we can know lots of things, such as that we have hands. Second, it must explain how it can seem that we don’t know these things. In slogan form, DeRose’s argument is that a contextualist semantics for knowledge attributions is needed to account for the “appearance of ignorance”—the appearance that we don’t know that skeptical hypotheses fail to obtain. In my critical discussion, I will argue inter alia that we don’t need a contextualist semantics to account for the appearance of ignorance, and in any case that the “strength” of the appearance of ignorance is unclear, as is the need for a philosophical diagnosis of it.


Author(s):  
Jennifer Hornsby

This article aims to connect Austin's seminal notion of a speech act with developments in philosophy of language over the last forty odd years. It starts by considering how speech acts might be conceived in Austin's general theory. Then it turns to the illocutionary acts with which much philosophical writing on speech acts has been concerned, and finally to the performatives which Austin's own treatment of speech as action took off from.


Philosophy ◽  
2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitchell Green

Pragmatics is a branch of the philosophy of language as well as a field of linguistics. Pragmatics is to be distinguished from pragmatism, which is a doctrine concerning the nature of truth and knowledge. Whereas proponents of pragmatism are pragmatists, students of pragmatics are pragmaticists. Imagine a communicative interaction among two or more parties. Pragmaticists generally study that part of what is communicated that is left over after the conventionally determined, literal meaning of any words used has been subtracted out. (This is in contrast to what remains after the conventionally permitted, literal meaning has been subtracted out—see The Pragmatic Determination of What is Said) In part because pragmatics falls within the ambit of linguistics, it has an empirical, indeed an experimental dimension. Topics comprising pragmatics include speech acts (a special case of which are performatives), implicature, indexicals, presupposition, speaker meaning, and the pragmatic determination of what is said. A topic that has recently received intensive discussion and is of obvious importance to pragmatics is the very delineation of semantics from pragmatics. Other topics that have received less extensive scrutiny include expression and expressiveness and the relation of illocutionary force to semantic content and grammatical mood. In addition to the topics comprising the field, the value of pragmatics as an explanatory enterprise may be gauged by its ability to illuminate familiar communicative phenomena: among these are metaphor, irony, the significance of epithets and other “charged” language, the distinction between lying to and misleading an audience, facial expression, communicative properties of intonation, and so-called pragmatic paradoxes. Theoretical discussions of pornography have also been influenced by pragmatics. Aside from linguistics, logical theory also has a stake in pragmatics insofar as the notion of good reasoning cannot be captured simply with the notion of soundness. (A circular argument, for instance, can be sound.) Further, on the strength of certain ways of drawing the pragmatics/semantics boundary, some phenomena traditionally in the purview of semantics have been construed as pragmatic instead: among these are Frege’s distinction between sense and reference and the phenomenon of non-referring proper names. Certain semantic strategies, then, have a stake in pragmatics.


Language ◽  
1970 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Koller ◽  
John R. Searle

2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen Habermas ◽  
Christoph Demmerling ◽  
Hans-Peter Krüger

Abstract Jürgen Habermas explicates the concept of communicative reason. He explains the key assumptions of the philosophy of language and social theory associated with this concept. Also discussed is the category of life-world and the role of the body-mind difference for the consciousness of exclusivity in our access to subjective experience. as well as the role of emotions and perceptions in the context of a theory of communicative action. The question of the redemption of the various validity claims as they are associated with the performance of speech acts is related to processes of social learning and to the role of negative experiences. Finally the interview deals with the relationship between religion and reason and the importance of religion in modern, post-secular societies. Questions about the philosophical culture of our present times are discussed at the end of the conversation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document