[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: More about questions and the like (was:What I have for dinner...")
- Subject: Re: More about questions and the like (was:What I have for dinner...")
- From: Pycyn@aol.com
- Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 05:10:36 EST
Problem 1: Given "for x, if x went to the party, then John knows thatx went
to the party" and that Paul went to the party, we might infer "John knows
that Paul went to the party." This sentence is ambiguous and the most likely
reading (it is usually said) may well be false. since John may never have
heard of Paul as such and may have him under a totally wrong-headed
description, so that we might never find out from John that Paul was there,
even though he knows of the man who is in fact Paul - whoever John may think
him to be -- that he went to the party. The set of answers solution for
questions needs quite a bit of extra work work to be addapted to indirect
questions (and propositional attitudes generally). Like including mappings
from the world to the belief worlds involved, for this one. And several
other things for the other ones.
Problem 2. From "Pegasus was the winged horse captured by Bellerophon" being
true, it is automatic to infer "There was a winged horse" and thence "Winged
horses have existed." But they haven't. The role of xu'a or whatever is
simply to prevent these inferences in the cases where context does not (and
so should always be used, just in case). It does not say which performative
is involved, only that it is opaquifying and that the ordinary rules thus do
not apply -- in particular, names need not denote. The alternatives -- in a
logical language -- are to make obvious truths false or to allow truth value
gaps or to deny the usual rules; none of these are impossible but all are
unpleasant.
pc