The Grice Club

Welcome

The Grice Club

The club for all those whose members have no (other) club.

Is Grice the greatest philosopher that ever lived?

Search This Blog

Friday, January 29, 2010

Grice on ஃ (Jack and Jill)

Grice claims -- in 2001 -- that

when Jill utters,

"Jack is an Englishman; he is, therefore, brave"

Jill is _not_ explying "ஃ". Only implying it.
Posted by at

1 comment:

  1. Luigi SperanzaJanuary 29, 2010 at 4:04 PM

    N. E. A. should be pleased to read this note, since, hey, he wrote his full PhD on this, allmost.

    For Jill we have

    her belief, explicit,
    to the effect

    i. Jack is an Englishman

    Second, we have her second belief,

    ii. Jack is brave

    But do we add a third belief to the effect that ii follows from i?

    Not a nary -- as they say?

    Jill's belief -- Grice holds -- on ஃ is merely "implicated" and conventionally at _that_.

    Grice is amusingly poking scorn on Strawson's contrived arguments to the contrary in the first ch. of "Introduction to Logical Theory".

    Oddly, Strawson was never consistent. For him, the horseshoe (the logician's 'if') implicates conventionally (vide Grandy in Heritage of Grice, Berkeley). But 'therefore' ALSO conventionally implicates.

    The problem is that the logical counterpart to 'therefore' -- the Tamil sign in the header -- is _meta_-logic, whereas the horseshoe is _logic_.

    For Grice, _logic_ conversationally implicate. Meta-logic may on occasion only conventionally so.

    Clear?

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)