Moorean absurdities and the nature of assertion

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 74 (1):135 – 149 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I argue that Moore's propositions, for example, 'I went to the pictures last Tuesday but I don't believe that I did' cannot be rationally believed. Their assertors either cannot be rationally believed or cannot be believed to be rational. This analysis is extended to Moorean propositions such as God knows that I am an atheist and I believe that this proposition is false. I then defend the following definition of assertion: anyone asserts that p iff that person expresses a belief that p with the intention of causing relevant epistemic change in the cognition of an actual or potential audience

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,783

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
94 (#182,612)

6 months
19 (#134,856)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

John N. Williams
Singapore Management University

Citations of this work

Believing Things Unknown.Aidan McGlynn - 2011 - Noûs 47 (2):385-407.
Illocutionary force and semantic content.Mitchell S. Green - 2000 - Linguistics and Philosophy 23 (5):435-473.
Assertion, Moore, and Bayes.Igor Douven - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 144 (3):361-375.
Moore's Paradox and Assertion.Clayton Littlejohn - 2020 - In Goldberg Sanford (ed.), Oxford Handbook on Assertion. Oxford University Press.

View all 17 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Knowledge and belief.Jaakko Hintikka - 1962 - Ithaca, N.Y.,: Cornell University Press.
On Denoting.Bertrand Russell - 1905 - Mind 14 (56):479-493.
On referring.Peter F. Strawson - 1950 - Mind 59 (235):320-344.

View all 32 references / Add more references