A Logical-Semantic Analysis of Predicates of Personal Taste in Assessments of Sensory Perception
https://doi.org/10.32603/2412-8562-2022-8-3-5-17
Abstract
Introduction. The article offers a comparative analysis of relativism and conceptualism in semantic of PPTs, which will allow us to investigate the properties of PPTs based on the experience of the subject.
Methodology and sources. A key role in the understanding of the truth value of utterances is played by D. Kaplan's two-dimensional semantics and D. Lewis' version of the semantics of possible worlds. These theories are expanded and supplemented in the modern semantics of taste, which are considered in this article on the example of the works of E.G. Bylinina, M. Glanzberg, D. Ninan, H. Pearson, T. Stephenson.
Results and discussion. Author comes to the conclusion that these theories stand on the same ontological and semantic attitudes associated with subjective perception, which help to relativism and contextualism describe the phenomenon of faultless disagreement. However, relativism and contextualism have not been able to explain this puzzle. The author tried to determine the role of this phenomenon in the semantics of taste, for which the role of first-hand experience in the utterances of taste is considered at the article. It is noted that the requirement of first-hand experience is necessary in modern semantic theories of PPTs, because it seems to be the only ontologically justified requirement.
Conclusion. The author comes to the conclusion that requirement of first-hand experience is not a necessary for semantic analysis of PPTs. For that, considering the different reading of individual terms at the end of the article allows us to come to the conclusion that statements of taste express propositional attitude.
Keywords
predicates of personal taste (PPTs),
contextualism,
relativism,
faultless disagreement,
semantic,
first-hand experience,
perception
Supporting agencies: The work was supported out within the project of the Russian Society for the History and Philosophy of Science, supported by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation (project No. 21-18-00496 “The semantic structure of the propositional attitudes of consciousness»”).
About the Author
P. A. Pavlukhina
Saint Petersburg State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Polina A. Pavlukhina – Student (4th year) of the Institute of Philosophy; Research fellow at the project of Russian Society for History and philosophy of Science “The semantic structure of the propositional attitudes of consciousness”. Area of expertise: philosophy of language, formal semantic, logic of evolution.
Mendeleev line, 5, St Peterburg 199034
References
1. Umbach, C. (2021), “Evaluative Predicates: Beyond Fun and Tasty”, The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Semantics, pp. 1–31.
2. Hirvonen, S. (2014), “Predicates of personal taste and perspective dependence”, Ph. D. Thesis, Univ. College London, London, UK.
3. Furey, H. (2017), “The Paradox of Gustatory Taste”, Ergo: an open access J. of philosophy, vol. 4, no. 17, pp. 481–527. DOI: 10.3998/ergo.12405314.0004.017.
4. Lasersohn, P. (2005), “Context dependence, disagreement, and predicates of personal taste”, Linguistics and Philosophy, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 643–686. DOI: 10.1007/s10988-005-0596-x.
5. Coppock, E. (2018), “Outlook-based semantic”, Linguist and Philosophy, vol. 41, pp. 125–164. DOI: 10.1007/s10988-017-9222-y.
6. Umbach, C. (2016), “Evaluative propositions and subjective judgments”, Subjective Meaning: Alternatives to Relativism, Gryuter, Berlin, pp. 127–168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110402001-008.
7. Ninan, D. (2014), “Taste predicates and the acquaintance inference”, Proceedings of SALT, vol. 24, pp. 290–309. DOI: 10.3765/salt.v24i0.2413.
8. Glanzberg, M. (2007), “Context, content, and relativism”, Philosophical Studies, vol. 136, pp. 1–29. DOI: 10.1007/s11098-007-9145-5.
9. Rudolph, R. (2018), “Talking about appearances: the roles of evaluation and experience in disagreement”, Philosophical Studies, vol. 177, no. 1, pp. 197–217. DOI: 10.1007/s11098-018-1185-5.
10. Anand, P. and Korotkova, N. (2021), “How to theorize about subjective language: A lesson from ‘de re’”, Linguistics and Philosophy, vol. 43, pp. 1–56. DOI: 10.1007/s10988-021-09331-0.
11. Zeman, D. (2020), “Faultless Disagreement”, The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Relativism, vol. 48, pp. 486–495.
12. Stephenson, T. (2007), “Judge dependence, epistemic modals, and predicates of personal taste”, Linguistics and Philosophy, vol. 30, iss. 4, pp. 487–525. DOI: 10.1007/s10988-008-9023-4.
13. Pearson, H. (2013), “A judge-free semantics for predicates of personal taste”, J. of Semantics, vol. 30, iss. 1, pp. 103–154. DOI: 10.1093/jos/ffs001.
14. Kaplan, D. (1989), “Demonstratives. An essay on the semantics, logic, metaphysics, and epistemology of demonstratives and other indexicals”, Themes from Kaplan, in Almog, J., Perry, J. and Wettstein, H. (eds.), Oxford Univ. Press, NY, USA, pp. 481–563.
15. Nuspliger, A. (2018), “Disagreements in philosophy substantive disagreements vs. Verbal dispute”, Ph. D Thesis, Univ. Osnabrück, Osnabrück, GER.
16. Bylinina, L. (2017), “Judge-dependence in degree constructions”, J. of Semantics, vol. 34, iss. 2, pp. 291–331. DOI:10.1093/jos/ffw011.
Review
For citations:
Pavlukhina P.A. A Logical-Semantic Analysis of Predicates of Personal Taste in Assessments of Sensory Perception. Discourse. 2022;8(3):5-17. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32603/2412-8562-2022-8-3-5-17
Views:
392
Email this article 