[hist-analytic] Elatically-Karulizing Pirots Karulize Elatically

Jlsperanza at aol.com Jlsperanza at aol.com
Mon Feb 9 06:30:04 EST 2009


-- true by virtue of ...? "Not true"?  

Post-modern Grice (Was: The analytic-synthetic distinction

A ps  on Grice, short as I can make it.
I did disucss Grice's two examples of  'tautology' in 'Logic and 
Conversation' (WOW, ii)

War is war.
Women is  women.

These are really of the form Frege would have as (x)Fx ) Fx. So  it's not 
really 'tautology' as per truth-table. We need an interpretation, a  
class-overlap, class assignment, individual assignment, interpretation of ')',  
interpretation of '(x)' -- as substitutional, say. 

In any case what  interests is is Grice's judgement: they are 
_uninformative_. This is a nudge (if  that's the word) to Frege, Russell, and logicism -- not 
to _Quine_!

To  see why they are uninformative (they don't speak about the world) we need 
 further to buy, perhaps, Grice's idea of conversation as the purposeful 
exchange  of conversational moves that will _influence_ others by informing them 
about the  'state' of the world. 

The example of truly analytic, in Grice/Strawson  is

My three-year old son is an adult.

They go to consider, "Avoid  metaphorical interpretation here" and so they 
end up with the reply to this  being "Inconceivable!". Since there _is_ a 
possible reply to an analytically  _false_ sentence, they gather there could be a 
similar one ('Conceivable!') to  an analytically true one. Ditto, the reply to 
synthetic sentences is either "I  don't believe that!" in the case of false 
ones of "I do believe that!" in case  of true ones (S. R. Bayne keeps 'In defense 
of a dogma' in the  archives).

Two more points, while I say that my views and this are formed  by Grice's 
"Life and Opinions" as to the defense of the analytic/synthetic  distinction. 

* -- IDIOLECTAL meaning. B. Aune discusses this when he  notes that English 
is highly spoken in the world today (I mean spoken by a few).  Grice saw this 
problem, and in 'Conceptual Analysis and the Province of  Philosophy' but also 
in the more charming "Oxford philosophy" which he delivered  at Wellesey (of 
all places) he speaks of a concept having 'extension' for one  speaker only. 
Thus 'bachelors are unmarried males' may be analytically false to  a student at 
Wellesey who is about to become a bachelor and she is not a male --  nor 
unmarried, as the case transpired.

* -- Grice loved Carnap's "Pirots  karulize elatically", and uses 'pirot' 
extensively. I would say that, 'by virtue  of its form', it's not analytic. Of 
course if we go to define what types of  pirots we are talking about, or 
defining the pirot in the subject-position, then  it may become thus. But the change 
needed would amount rather to state, rather  uninformatively:

elatically  karulizing pirots karulize elatically

which again shows that 'analytic'  can be shown to be thus 'by virtue of its 
(extended logical) form'. What about  the other implicit sentences, of other 
forms. "Unless they are not given the  proper expansion, treat them as 
_synthetic_. 

* Then there's really  analytic sentences of the type Levinson discusses in  
_Pragmatics_:

"Either he will be fired, or  he won't"

This is analytic by virtue of its logical form, and thus a  correlate would be

Either pirots  karulize elatically, or they don't.

(provided they exist? Not  even)

Again, these uninformative 'tautologies' get an implicature which  is 
_different_ for each case. The expansion for "My three little year son is an  adult" 
properly expanded does not speak about the world. But does it not at  least 
express that the utterer has a child? With children like that!   (*expansion: My 
three little year son-non adult is an adult). The child is what  my aunt 
would call a 'contradiction' in terms!

I think it's Harnish who  considers expansion of analytic predicates to tease 
the addressee:

"I met  a female adult yesterday"
in lieu of the shorter, "I met a woman".  Implicature: "not really 
attractive, as women go".

But "I met a female  adult yesterday" _is_ synthetic (He could have stayed 
indoors and avoid the  proceedings). A truly analytic of this kind will be 
sentece 3 in the second  speaker's reply -- otiose if ever a sentence was). 

-- "Mary is not  really a woman; she is an adult female"
-- I disagree. Mary, who is an adult  female, is an adult female, and thus a 
woman. In fact, all females are females,  and all women are women. 

Cheers,

JL  

**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1218550342x1201216770/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=fe
bemailfooterNO62)




More information about the hist-analytic mailing list