Search

In the Tractatus (Prop. 2.0211) Wittgenstein claims that a sentence expresses the same proposition in every possible world and, hence, which proposition is expressed cannot depend on how each world is (otherwise we have different propositions in each world). In this paper, I shall explore the interpretation of this thesis under the perspective of Stalnaker���s (1978) theory of assertions as the reduction of the context set, i.e., the set of possible worlds compatible with the information gathered at a conversation. In Stalnaker���s version, this principle follows from the explication of assertions as having the illocutionary point of excluding some possible worlds from the context set. If there is no unique instruction to exclude some worlds, then it is not clear which reduction is meant by the speaker. This might lead to a better understanding of (and motivation for) Wittgenstein���s own version., {"references":["Anscombe, G. Elisabeth M. (1959). An Introduction to Wittgenstein's Tractatus. London: Hutchinson University Library.","Black, Max (1964). A Companion to Wittgenstein's' Tractatus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.","Zalabardo, José L. (2015). Representation and Reality in Wittgenstein's Tractatus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.","Davies, Martin and Humberstone, L. (1980). \"Two Notions of Necessity\". Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, vol. 38, num. 1: pp. 1–30.","Evans, Gareth (1979). Reference and Contingency. The Monist, vol. 62 num. 2: pp. 161–189.","Fogelin, Robert (1987). Wittgenstein. The Arguments of the Philosophers. London: Routledge.","Jackson, Frank (1998). From Metaphysics to Ethics: A Defence of Conceptual Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.","Jackson, Frank (2001). Precis of from metaphysics to ethics. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 62: pp. 617–624.","Kaplan, David (1977). \"Demonstratives. An Essay on the Semantics, Logic, Metaphysics and Epistemology of Demonstratives and Other Indexicals\". In: J. Almog, and Perry, J., and Wettstein, H. (eds). Themes From Kaplan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 481-563.","Kripke, Saul (1980). Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.","Lewis, David (1997). Naming the Colours. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, vol. 75, num. 3, pp. 325–342.","Morris, Charles W. (1938). Foundations of the Theory of Signs. In: International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, pp. 1–59. Chicago: Chicago University Press.","Pears, David (1987). The False Prison. Vol. I. Oxford: Oxford University Press.","Putnam, Hilary (1975). \"The Meaning of 'Meaning'\". Philosophical Papers, vol. 2, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.","Searle, John (1979). \"A Taxonomy of Illocutionary Acts\". In Searle, J., editor, Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–29","Stalnaker, Robert (1978). \"Assertion\". In: Stalnaker, R., editor, Context and Content. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 78–95","Stalnaker, Robert (2004). \"Assertion Revisited: On the Interpretation of Two-Dimensional Modal Semantics\". Reprinted in García-Carpintero, M., and Macià, J. (Eds). Two-Dimensional Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2006), pp. 293–309.","Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1979). Notebooks, 1914-1916. Edited by G. H. von Wright and G. E. M. Anscombe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.","Zalabardo, José L. (2015). Representation and Reality in Wittgenstein's Tractatus. Oxford: Oxford University Press."]}

In the Tractatus (Prop. 2.0211) Wittgenstein claims that a sentence expresses the same proposition in every possible world and, hence, which proposition is expressed cannot depend on how each world is (otherwise we have different propositions in each world). In this paper, I shall explore the interpretation of this thesis under the perspective of Stalnaker’s (1978) theory of assertions as the reduction of the context set, i.e., the set of possible worlds compatible with the information gathered at a conversation. In Stalnaker’s version, this principle follows from the explication of assertions as having the illocutionary point of excluding some possible worlds from the context set. If there is no unique instruction to exclude some worlds, then it is not clear which reduction is meant by the speaker. This might lead to a better understanding of (and motivation for) Wittgenstein’s own version.

Cataloged from PDF version of article. Thesis (M.S.): Bilkent University, Department of Philosophy, İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University, 2018. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 39-41). Actual human agents have limited cognitive capacity. They might display deductive failure, contradictory beliefs and imperfect recall. These and other similar cases raise a problem for idealized models of belief and behavior. The purpose of this thesis is to provide a way to accommodate these cases through a model of belief formation and retrieval based on information access. I will argue that belief formation and retrieval are sensitive to the informational context within which they take place. Human agents deploy information relative to the set of possibilities they take to be relevant. by Ali Kerem Eroğlu. M.A.