Is ‘No’ a Force-Indicator? Yes, Sooner or Later!

Logica Universalis 11 (2):225-251 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper discusses the philosophical and logical motivations for rejectivism, primarily by considering a dialogical approach to logic, which is formalized in a Question–Answer Semantics. We develop a generalized account of rejectivism through close consideration of Mark Textor's arguments against rejectivism that the negative expression ‘No’ is never used as an act of rejection and is equivalent with a negative sentence. In doing so, we also shed light upon well-known issues regarding the supposed non-embeddability and non-iterability of force indicators.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-05-20

Downloads
583 (#52,495)

6 months
122 (#52,203)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

James Trafford
University For The Creative Arts
Fabien Schang
Université de Lorraine (PhD)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The logical basis of metaphysics.Michael Dummett - 1991 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
The Connectives.Lloyd Humberstone - 2011 - MIT Press. Edited by Lloyd Humberstone.
Doubt truth to be a liar.Graham Priest - 2006 - New York: Oxford University Press.
The Logical Basis of Metaphysics.Michael Dummett, Hilary Putnam & James Conant - 1994 - Philosophical Quarterly 44 (177):519-527.

View all 40 references / Add more references