Switch to: References

Citations of:

The principle of charity

Dialogue 43 (4):671-683 (2004)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Triangulation, Untranslatability, and Reconciliation.Nathaniel Goldberg - 2009 - Philosophia 37 (2):261-280.
    Donald Davidson used triangulation to do everything from explicate psychological and semantic externalism, to attack relativism and skepticism, to propose conditions necessary for thought and talk. At one point Davidson tried to bring order to these remarks by identifying three kinds of triangulation, each operative in a different situation. Here I take seriously Davidson’s talk of triangular situations and extend it. I start by describing Davidson’s situations. Next I establish the surprising result that considerations from one situation entail the possibility (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Tension Within Triangulation.Nathaniel Goldberg - 2008 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 46 (3):363-383.
    Philosophers disagree about how meaning connects with history. Donald Davidson, who helped deepen our understanding of meaning, even disagreed with himself. As Ernest Lepore and Kirk Ludwig note, Davidson’s account of radical interpretation treats meaning as ahistorical; his Swampman thought experiment treats it as historical. Here I show that while Lepore and Ludwig are right that Davidson’s views are in tension, they are wrong about its extent. Unbeknownst to them, Davidson’s account of radical interpretation and Swampman thought experiment both rely—in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Organizing, Fitting, Predicting.Nilanjan Bhowmick - 2020 - Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research 38 (1):39-52.
    This article introduces a dilemma regarding conceptual schemes and suggests a solution. The dilemma is about whether there are conceptual schemes or not. There are good reasons for maintaining either position. There must be conceptual schemes because theory is underdetermined by evidence. And there cannot be conceptual schemes because Davidson has given an almost unassailable argument against it. I resolve the dilemma by arguing that Davidson’s argument is based on a false dilemma generated by too strong a principle of charity. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
    Export citation