Kindermann Dirk
Institute of Philosophy, Universität Wien, Universitätsring 1, 1010 Vienna, Austria.
Synthese. 2021;198(5):4035-4055. doi: 10.1007/s11229-019-02326-2. Epub 2019 Jul 31.
How should we account for the contextual variability of knowledge claims? Many philosophers favour an invariantist account on which such contextual variability is due entirely to pragmatic factors, leaving no interesting context-sensitivity in the semantic meaning of 'know that.' I reject this invariantist division of labor by arguing that pragmatic invariantists have no principled account of embedded occurrences of ' knows/doesn't know that ': Occurrences embedded within larger linguistic constructions such as conditional sentences, attitude verbs, expressions of probability, comparatives, and many others, I argue, give rise to a threefold problem of embedded implicatures.
我们应该如何解释知识主张的语境变异性？许多哲学家倾向于一种不变论的解释，即这种语境变异性完全归因于语用因素，使得“知道……”的语义意义不存在有趣的语境敏感性。我反对这种不变论的分工方式，理由是语用不变论者对于“知道/不知道……”的嵌入出现情况没有原则性的解释：我认为，嵌入在诸如条件句、态度动词、概率表达式、比较词以及许多其他更大语言结构中的出现情况，会引发一个关于嵌入含义的三重问题。
