more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 19217

[filed under theme 19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 1. Meaning ]

Full Idea

The Aboutness Assumption says that necessarily, if a proposition is directly about an entity, then that proposition stands in a relation to the entity. I shall argue that the Assumption is false.

Gist of Idea

I don't accept that if a proposition is directly about an entity, it has a relation to the entity

Source

Trenton Merricks (Propositions [2015], 5.VII)

Book Ref

Merricks,Trenton: 'Propositions' [OUP 2015], p.186


A Reaction

This feels sort of right, though the nature of aboutness remains elusive. He cites denials of existence. I take speech to be fairly internal, even though its main role is communication. Maybe its a Cambridge relation, as far as the entity is concerned.


The 17 ideas from 'Propositions'

Propositions are standardly treated as possible worlds, or as structured [Merricks]
Propositions can be 'about' an entity, but that doesn't make the entity a constituent of it [Merricks]
Propositions are necessary existents which essentially (but inexplicably) represent things [Merricks]
A sentence's truth conditions depend on context [Merricks]
True propositions existed prior to their being thought, and might never be thought [Merricks]
'Snow is white' only contingently expresses the proposition that snow is white [Merricks]
Sentence logic maps truth values; predicate logic maps objects and sets [Merricks]
'Cicero is an orator' represents the same situation as 'Tully is an orator', so they are one proposition [Merricks]
Simple Quantified Modal Logc doesn't work, because the Converse Barcan is a theorem [Merricks]
The Converse Barcan implies 'everything exists necessarily' is a consequence of 'necessarily, everything exists' [Merricks]
The standard view of propositions says they never change their truth-value [Merricks]
Early Russell says a proposition is identical with its truthmaking state of affairs [Merricks]
Unity of the proposition questions: what unites them? can the same constituents make different ones? [Merricks]
We want to explain not just what unites the constituents, but what unites them into a proposition [Merricks]
In twinning, one person has the same origin as another person [Merricks]
I don't accept that if a proposition is directly about an entity, it has a relation to the entity [Merricks]
Arguers often turn the opponent's modus ponens into their own modus tollens [Merricks]