Authors
Tim Sundell
University of Kentucky
Abstract
I call into question a pair of closely related assumptions that are almost universally shared in the literature on predicates of taste. The assumptions are, first, that predicates of taste – words like ‘tasty’ – are semantically evaluative. In other words, that it is part of the meaning of a word like ‘tasty’ to describe an object as in some sense good, or to say that it is pleasing. And second, that the meaning of predicates of taste is in some way relativized to an experiencer or standard – the person that the object is pleasing to or the standard according to which the object is good. Parties to the literature on these terms tend to disagree about the role of context in determining the truth of claims involving predicates of taste, or in determining which proposition is expressed. But they agree that to call some dish ‘tasty’ is to say something positive about that dish, to suggest that someone or other finds, or is disposed to find, the dish pleasing. I suggest instead that ‘tasty’, and indeed...
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/0020174X.2016.1208918
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,944
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Language of Morals.Richard Mervyn Hare - 1952 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Philosophical Papers.J. L. Austin - 1961 - Oxford University Press.
Conceptual Ethics I.Alexis Burgess & David Plunkett - 2013 - Philosophy Compass 8 (12):1091-1101.

View all 17 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Metalinguistic Negotiation and Speaker Error.David Plunkett & Tim Sundell - 2021 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 64 (1-2):142-167.
Identity Display: Another Motive for Metalinguistic Disagreement.Alexander Davies - 2021 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 64 (8):861-882.
Thick Ethical Concepts.Pekka Väyrynen - 2016 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
What Metalinguistic Negotiations Can't Do.Teresa Marques - 2017 - Phenomenology and Mind (12):40-48.
How to Have a Metalinguistic Dispute.Poppy Mankowitz - 2021 - Synthese 199 (3-4):5603-5622.

View all 16 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Perspective in Taste Predicates and Epistemic Modals.Jonathan Schaffer - 2009 - In Andy Egan & Brian Weatherson (eds.), Epistemic Modality. Oxford University Press.
A Judge-Free Semantics for Predicates of Personal Taste.H. Pearson - 2013 - Journal of Semantics 30 (1):103-154.
Varieties of Disagreement and Predicates of Taste.Torfinn Thomesen Huvenes - 2012 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (1):167-181.
Disputing About Taste.Andy Egan - 2010 - In Ted Warfield & Richard Feldman (eds.), Disagreement. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 247-286.
Binding, Genericity, and Predicates of Personal Taste.Eric Snyder - 2013 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 56 (2-3):278-306.
Relative Truth and the First Person.Friederike Moltmann - 2010 - Philosophical Studies 150 (2):187-220..
Aesthetic Adjectives.Louise McNally & Isidora Stojanovic - 2014 - In James Young (ed.), The Semantics of Aesthetic Judgment. Oxford University Press.
The Subjective Basis of Kant's Judgment of Taste.Brian Watkins - 2011 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 54 (4):315-336.
Kant on the Normativity of Taste: The Role of Aesthetic Ideas.Andrew Chignell - 2007 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (3):415 – 433.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-08-11

Total views
58 ( #194,088 of 2,498,022 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #212,593 of 2,498,022 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes