[hist-analytic] Intention and Uncertainty

steve bayne baynesrb at yahoo.com
Tue Jul 7 20:31:29 EDT 2009

I have to reply piece meal since your post covers a lot of territory.

I note with interest that Grice does not mention the shopping list
case. What, specifically, do we have to relate the two in this case.
Before you cited something on fitting. I don't have easy access to
this right now, but was there a mention of Anscombe by name in 
any of these papers?

I can't believe that her 1957 book had no influence on Grice, but 
given the paucity of citations of others in her own work, I don't count
this against Grice. Anscombe is evasive on the subject of meaning in 
natural language. By this I mean that she rarely addresses the idea of 
meaning directly.

If we can get hold of Grices British Academy Lecture I would put it 
on Hist-Analytic in a heart beat. The British Academy is remarkably 
generous in allowing others to use the lectures; they are a model and 
I would not in this regard anticipate any difficulty. So if we can get 
this I could put it up.  

'And then Grice writes (all emphasis mine)

            "This  point _may_ be (and *I think* _has_ been

             [Footnote 1 -- "1 By Professor Anscombe"])

             put vividly by saying that

            if a man  fails to fulfil an intention

            we do  not criticise his state of mind

            for  failing to conform to the facts,

            we  criticise the facts

            for  failing to conform to this

            state of  mind."'

Yes, this is thematic in Anscombe; one finds something like 
it Prichard. By the way, your notation on fitting is fine; I think 
Searle's method is elegant but where does one go from there?!

Or to use Grice's example above (crediting Anscombe) for the  vividness.

Oh, I see you followed my comments on Zeleny; he is a very bright 
fellow, and more importantly, somewhat interesting. When I say things like 

"a man fails to fulfil his intention"

There is an evaluation of his action as accomplishing his end, but
I don't mean that he is morally benefited by satisfying his intentions; 
for example if they are evil, etc.
I haven't gone into implicature; this is deserving of extended treatment, 
but if I march off in this direction I might never return.

You remark:

"of  over-rotten French mushrooms, anyways [sic])."

Now why am I under the impression that only someone from 
S. America would say this. I like this but a DO have to commend the
French for making interesting practically everything at which they 
excel, from cooking to chemistry; politics to geometry. In fact I'm 
thinking about putting up Nicod or Hintikka on Descartes. He would 
never object to this and I think I can get all other rights in order.

Grandy's quessertion? I'm unfamiliar with this. Sounds interesting. 
I'll recheck WoW for it.

"for the 'boulomaic' operator"

It's things like "boulomaic operators" that drove me to Samuel Alexander.

I'll pick this up, hopefully, where I left off later.



--- On Mon, 7/6/09, Jlsperanza at aol.com <Jlsperanza at aol.com> wrote:

From: Jlsperanza at aol.com <Jlsperanza at aol.com>
Subject: Intention and Uncertainty
To: hist-analytic at simplelists.co.uk
Date: Monday, July 6, 2009, 9:25 AM

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rbjones.com/pipermail/hist-analytic_rbjones.com/attachments/20090707/e085fe18/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the hist-analytic mailing list