On predicator rules and indexicality

Clément Lion

Abstract


We argue that no attempt of reducing meaning to a systematic set of rules, according to which the role of linguistic expressions is to be normatively defined, can be abstracted from an irreducibly decisional compound. By comparing Lorenzen’s project of building an Ortho-languageand Brandom’s inferentialist take on meaning, we distinguish two ways of acknowledging this fact, while claiming that Lorenzen’s take is more genuinely constructive, insofar as choices be thought of as genuine features of constructions. It brings into a new perspective the relation between dialogical constructivism and Brouwer’s intuitionism. Finally we bring up a philosophical argument for the claim that interaction rules should be indexed on players and on their choices, when providing deontic bases to semantics.


Keywords


Ortho-language; predicator rules; inferentialist; choices; dialogic; semantics

Full Text:

PDF

References


Becker, O. (1927). Mathematische Existenz. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Brandom, R. B. (1994). Making it explicit. Reasoning, Representing and Discursive Commitments. Cambridge, Massachussets and London: Harvard University Press.

Brandom, R. B. (2000). Articulating Reasons. An introduction to Inferentialism. Cambridge, Massachussets and London: Harvard University Press.

Brouwer, L.E.J (1975). Collected Works. Ed. by Arend Heyting. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Brouwer, L.E.J. (1928). Die Struktur des Kontinuum. Wien: Komitee zur Veranstaltung von Gastvorträgen ausländischer Gelehrter der exakten Wissenschaften.

Dummett, M. (1978a). Can Analytical Philosophy be Systematic, and ought it to be? In Truth and other Enigmas. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Dummett, M. (1978b). The Philosophical Basis of Intuitionistic Logic. In Truth and other Enigmas. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Kamlah, W., Lorenzen, P. (1996). Logische Propädeutik: Vorschule des vernünftigen Redens. Stuttgart, Weimar: Verlag J. B. Metzler.

Le Roy, E. (1930). La Pensée intuitive, II. Invention et Vérification. Paris: Boivin et Cie.

Lorenz, K. (2010). Logic, Language and Method. Berlin: De Gruyter.

Lorenzen, P., Lorenz, K. (1978). Dialogische Logik. Darmstadt, Germany: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

Lorenzen, P., Schwemmer, O. (1975). Konstruktive Logik, Ethik und Wissenschaftstheorie. Mannheim: Bibliographisches Institut A.G.

Martin-Löf, P. (2017a). Assertion and request. Lecture held at Oslo. Transcription by A. Klev. (no published work)

Martin-Löf, P. (2017b). Assertion and request. Lecture held at Stockholm. Transcription by A. Klev. (no published work)

Peirce, Ch. S. (1974). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Ed. By Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss. Cambridge, Massachussets: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Rahman, Sh. et al. (2018). Immanent Reasoning or Equality in Action: A Plaidoyer for the Play Level(Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning Series). Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing.

Schneider, H. J. (1999). Phantäsie und Kalkül. Über die Polarität von Handlung und Struktur in der Sprache. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Schneider, H. J. (2014). Wittgenstein’s later Theory of Meaning. Trans. by Timothy Doyle and Daniel Smyth. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell.

Wittgenstein, L. (1984). Philosophische Untersuchungen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22370/rhv2019iss13pp18-33

Copyright (c) 2019 Humanities Journal of Valparaiso

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.