Psychology Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Nonfactualism: Nonfactualism is an expression for the assumption that there are no facts with regard to certain decision-making processes. For example, there is no fact that causes the sum of two and two to be four. Nonfactualism is interpreted very differently by different authors. Therefore, the expression is sometimes used polemically. See also truth makers, decidability, facts, truth, deflationism._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Paul Boghossian on Nonfactualism - Dictionary of Arguments
Wright I 267 Rules/Wittgenstein/Wright: whatever Wittgenstein's dialectics exactly achieve, in any case it enforces some kind of restriction for a realistic notion of rules and meaning. >Rules/Wittgenstein, >Rule following/Wittgenstein, >Meaning/Wittgenstein, >Meaning. I 268 And therefore also for truth, since truth is a function of meaning. I 269 Paul Boghossian: he has now presented an approach that could eliminate both concerns: I 270 Boghossian: we consider a non-factualism which is exclusively concerned with meaning (not truth): There is no property of the kind that a word means something, and consequently no such fact. >Facts, >Properties. Since the truth condition of a proposition is a function of its meaning, non-factualism necessarily implies a non-factualism with regard to the truth conditions. >Truth conditions. Then the following results: (5) For all S, P: "S has the truth condition P" is not truth conditional. According to quotation redemption: (4) For each S: "S" is not truth conditional. >Truth conditional semantics. "Fascinating Consequence"/Boghossian: of a non-factualism of the meaning: a global non-factualism. And precisely in this, a non-factualism differs from the meaning of non-factualism with respect to any other object. I 271 WrightVsBoghosian: many will protest against his implicit philosophy of truth, but nothing can be objected to the use of the word alone. Boghossian: Global Minimalism, Non-Factualism: regarding meaning, not truth: There is no property that a word means something, and consequently no fact, is a result of global nonfactualism, as opposed to all other nonfactualisms. Wright I 271 Realism/Wright: so far, the question has been asked which additional realism-relevant properties can make the truth predicate "substantive". We can now use "correctness" ("correct") for the minimum case. (Formal >correctness). The thesis of non-factualism can then be formulated in such a way that any discourse on meaning and related terms is at most capable of being correct, and does not qualify for more substantial properties. (i) It is not the case that "S has the truth condition that P" has a truth condition. As a minimalist, one has to accept this, since truth conditions attribute a semantic, i.e., substantive property, and this is denied by the proposition. >Semantic properties. Next: (ii) It is not the case that "S has the truth condition that P" is true. I 272 This follows from (i) since only one sentence with a truth condition can be true. Next: (iii) It is not the case that S has the truth condition that P This follows, according to Boghossian, "due to the quotation redemption properties of the truth predicate". >Truth predicate, >Disquotation, >Disquotationalism, >Deflationism. I 272ff Nonfactualism/Boghossian/Wright: > then every discourse can be at the most correct. (i) is not the case that "S has the truth condition that P" has a truth condition" - WrightVs: can be reworded with quotation redemption (vi) is not the case that it is not the case that S has the truth condition that P has a truth condition - but denial of truth is not inconsistent with the correctness of the assertion, however, (i) is not correct if both truth and correctness are involved, the matrix for that truth predicate (Definition) does not have to be conservative: i.e. That the value of ""A"is true" becomes false or incorrect in all cases, except where A is attributed with the value true. ((s) Non-conservativity demands truth, not just correctness, >truth transfer. "Correct": truth predicate "correct" is for minimal discourses that can be true. Negation/Logic/Truth/Correctness/Correct: If both truth and correctness are involved, there is a distinction (> negation) between the: a) real, strict negation: it transforms each true or correct sentence into a false or incorrect one, another negation form is: b) negation: it acts so that a true (or correct) proposition is constructed exactly when its argument does not reach any truth. >Negation/Boghossian._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Bogh I Paul Boghossian Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism Oxford 2007 Boghe I Peter Boghossian A manual for Creating Atheists Charlottesville 2013 WrightCr I Crispin Wright Truth and Objectivity, Cambridge 1992 German Edition: Wahrheit und Objektivität Frankfurt 2001 WrightCr II Crispin Wright "Language-Mastery and Sorites Paradox" In Truth and Meaning, G. Evans/J. McDowell, Oxford 1976 WrightGH I Georg Henrik von Wright Explanation and Understanding, New York 1971 German Edition: Erklären und Verstehen Hamburg 2008 |
||
> Counter arguments against Boghossian
> Counter arguments in relation to Nonfactualism
