Loar’s Puzzle, Similarity, and Knowledge of Reference

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: ONOFRI,ANDREA
Publication Date: 2019
Format: Article
Language: eng
Source: Manuscrito (Online)
Download full: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452019000200001
Summary: Abstract In ‘The Semantics of Singular Terms’ (1976) Brian Loar proposed a famous case where a hearer seems to misunderstand an utterance even though he has correctly identified its referent. Loar’s case has been used to defend a model of communication where speaker and hearer must think of the referent in similar ways in order for communication to succeed. This ‘Similar Ways of Thinking’ (SW) theory is extremely popular, both in the literature on Loar cases and in other philosophical discussions. My goal is to offer a novel argument against this influential model of communication and propose an alternative picture. First, I show how a certain version of SW fails to solve Loar’s puzzle. Then I point at a more general problem with SW, arguing that no version of this model can account for Loar-style cases without making the conditions for communication too strict. I then propose an alternative account of Loar cases, analyzing them as cases of luck where the hearer does not know that she has identified the referent correctly. I conclude by contrasting my view with other existing accounts of Loar cases.
id UNICAMP-17_c2b14af682c33d5c41779cb606ff53b9
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0100-60452019000200001
network_acronym_str UNICAMP-17
network_name_str Manuscrito (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Loar’s Puzzle, Similarity, and Knowledge of ReferenceCommunicationReferenceSingular termsSimilarityKnowledgeAbstract In ‘The Semantics of Singular Terms’ (1976) Brian Loar proposed a famous case where a hearer seems to misunderstand an utterance even though he has correctly identified its referent. Loar’s case has been used to defend a model of communication where speaker and hearer must think of the referent in similar ways in order for communication to succeed. This ‘Similar Ways of Thinking’ (SW) theory is extremely popular, both in the literature on Loar cases and in other philosophical discussions. My goal is to offer a novel argument against this influential model of communication and propose an alternative picture. First, I show how a certain version of SW fails to solve Loar’s puzzle. Then I point at a more general problem with SW, arguing that no version of this model can account for Loar-style cases without making the conditions for communication too strict. I then propose an alternative account of Loar cases, analyzing them as cases of luck where the hearer does not know that she has identified the referent correctly. I conclude by contrasting my view with other existing accounts of Loar cases.UNICAMP - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência2019-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452019000200001Manuscrito v.42 n.2 2019reponame:Manuscrito (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)instacron:UNICAMP10.1590/0100-6045.2019.v42n2.aoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessONOFRI,ANDREAeng2019-08-09T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0100-60452019000200001Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=0100-6045&lng=pt&nrm=isoPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpmwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br2317-630X0100-6045opendoar:2019-08-09T00:00Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Loar’s Puzzle, Similarity, and Knowledge of Reference
title Loar’s Puzzle, Similarity, and Knowledge of Reference
spellingShingle Loar’s Puzzle, Similarity, and Knowledge of Reference
ONOFRI,ANDREA
Communication
Reference
Singular terms
Similarity
Knowledge
title_short Loar’s Puzzle, Similarity, and Knowledge of Reference
title_full Loar’s Puzzle, Similarity, and Knowledge of Reference
title_fullStr Loar’s Puzzle, Similarity, and Knowledge of Reference
title_full_unstemmed Loar’s Puzzle, Similarity, and Knowledge of Reference
title_sort Loar’s Puzzle, Similarity, and Knowledge of Reference
author ONOFRI,ANDREA
author_facet ONOFRI,ANDREA
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv ONOFRI,ANDREA
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Communication
Reference
Singular terms
Similarity
Knowledge
topic Communication
Reference
Singular terms
Similarity
Knowledge
description Abstract In ‘The Semantics of Singular Terms’ (1976) Brian Loar proposed a famous case where a hearer seems to misunderstand an utterance even though he has correctly identified its referent. Loar’s case has been used to defend a model of communication where speaker and hearer must think of the referent in similar ways in order for communication to succeed. This ‘Similar Ways of Thinking’ (SW) theory is extremely popular, both in the literature on Loar cases and in other philosophical discussions. My goal is to offer a novel argument against this influential model of communication and propose an alternative picture. First, I show how a certain version of SW fails to solve Loar’s puzzle. Then I point at a more general problem with SW, arguing that no version of this model can account for Loar-style cases without making the conditions for communication too strict. I then propose an alternative account of Loar cases, analyzing them as cases of luck where the hearer does not know that she has identified the referent correctly. I conclude by contrasting my view with other existing accounts of Loar cases.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-04-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452019000200001
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452019000200001
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/0100-6045.2019.v42n2.ao
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv UNICAMP - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência
publisher.none.fl_str_mv UNICAMP - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Manuscrito v.42 n.2 2019
reponame:Manuscrito (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron:UNICAMP
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron_str UNICAMP
institution UNICAMP
reponame_str Manuscrito (Online)
collection Manuscrito (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv mwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br
_version_ 1748950065735532544