Attribution of de re propositional attitudes as a means of persuasion

Author:

Tiskin Daniel B.1,Frolov Konstantin G.2

Affiliation:

1. Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universi­ty; National Research University Higher School of Economics

2. National Research University Higher School of Economics

Abstract

By de re propositional attitude ascription for rhetorical purposes, we will understand ut­tering a modal statement wherein the speaker deliberately uses a description of the attitude’s object which she knows to be unavailable to the attitude holder. As the existence of rhetorical de re is revealed, it gives rise to two questions that will be the primary concern of the present paper. (1) Using a rhetorical de re ascription, does the speaker utter something false in the model-theoretic sense? (2) Would it be justified to classify rhetorical de re as a rhetorical ploy designed to, or naturally predisposed to, mislead the addressee? This paper argues that the first question can be answered positively but the second one should receive a negative answer. We show that the question of whether a certain instance of rhetorical de re is a ploy or act of manipulation should be answered depending not on whether the statement is clearly false for the speaker but on whether it is clearly unacceptable for the speaker. In case the speaker herself considers the argument made by means of the statement acceptable, there is no reason to de­nounce such a communicative act as a ploy or manipulation irrespective of which model-theoretic truth-value the statement has. There are therefore reasons to incorporate rhetorical considerations into the modelling of how attitude reports are interpreted, in addition to con­siderations of truth and epistemological aspects, championed by Frege.

Publisher

Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University

Subject

Literature and Literary Theory,Language and Linguistics

Reference25 articles.

1. Aloni, M., 2001. Quantification under conceptual covers. PhD thesis. ILLC, Universi­ty of Amsterdam.

2. Bach, K., 1997. Do Belief Reports Report Beliefs? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 78, pp. 215—241.

3. Blumberg, K. and Lederman, Н., 2021. Revisionist Reporting. Philosophical Stu­dies, 178, pp. 755—783, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-020-01457-4.

4. Bowell, T., Cowan, R. and Kemp, G., 2020. Critical Thinking: A Concise Guide. 5th ed. Routledge.

5. Demirok, Ö., 2019. Scope Theory Revisited: Lessons from pied-piping in wh-questions. PhD thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3