作为说服手段的非命题态度的归因

Q2 Arts and Humanities Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.5922/2225-5346-2023-4-4
Daniel B. Tiskin, Konstantin G. Frolov
{"title":"作为说服手段的非命题态度的归因","authors":"Daniel B. Tiskin, Konstantin G. Frolov","doi":"10.5922/2225-5346-2023-4-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":34136,"journal":{"name":"Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attribution of de re propositional attitudes as a means of persuasion\",\"authors\":\"Daniel B. Tiskin, Konstantin G. Frolov\",\"doi\":\"10.5922/2225-5346-2023-4-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5922/2225-5346-2023-4-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5922/2225-5346-2023-4-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

通过修辞目的的反命题态度归因,我们将理解在情态陈述中说话人故意使用她知道态度持有者无法获得的态度对象的描述。随着修辞性的存在被揭示,它产生了两个问题,这将是本文主要关注的问题。(1)使用修辞性的归因,说话人是否说出了模型论意义上的虚假内容?(2)将修辞目的归类为旨在或天生倾向于误导收件人的修辞策略是否合理?本文认为,第一个问题可以得到肯定的回答,而第二个问题应该得到否定的回答。我们表明,回答一个特定的修辞实例是一种策略还是一种操纵行为的问题,不应取决于该陈述对说话者来说是否明显是错误的,而应取决于它对说话者来说是否明显是不可接受的。如果说话者自己认为通过陈述提出的论点是可以接受的,那么就没有理由否认这种交际行为是一种策略或操纵,而不管这种陈述具有哪种模型理论的真值。因此,除了弗雷格倡导的真理和认识论方面的考虑外,还有理由将修辞考虑纳入如何解释态度报告的建模中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Attribution of de re propositional attitudes as a means of persuasion
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent
Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
A part outside the whole? (To Anton Zimmerling's article “Really: syntactics without semiotics?”) Attribution of de re propositional attitudes as a means of persuasion On multiple semiotics integrally, aspectively and concretely How presuppositions and illocutionary force become components of sense: some implications from the analysis of fictitious names in Frege’s philosophy Where does the method come from? On the self-sufficiency of semiotic objects
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1