|Assertibility: in certain circumstances or in a historical situation the possibility to make a statement when the linguistic means are given._____________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. |
It is not the case that P is T iff. it is not the case that P is T.
This is not valid for justified assertibility from right to left. Assertibility is naturally weaker.
Justified Assertibility/Negation: Ignorance: P is not justifiably assertible, but neither is its negation.
Truth/Ignorance: something may very well be true, even though nothing is known about it.
Truth/Justified Assertibility: E.g. snow is white: the decision about truth and assertibility may diverge here.
I 51 Deflationism: true only means of affirmation, therefore not a standard different from assertibility.
A statement can be justified without being true and vice versa.
Field II 120
Assertibility/Wright/Putnam: is the only substantial property. - Because truth is not a property. - Field: both do go next to each other, because they diverge - truth goes deeper.
Wright I 35 Justified Assertibility/Assertibility/Negation: E.g. it is not the case that P is T iff. it is not the case that P is T - This is not valid for justified assertibility from right to left - in case of ignorance, the negation is not assertible either.
I 52 ~~
Truth: timeless - justified assertibility: not timeless.
I 68 ~
Def Super-Assertibility: a statement is super-assertible if it is justified or can be justified and if its justification survived both any scrutiny of its descent and arbitrarily extensive additions and improvements to the information. - Ideal Circumstances/Putnam: timeless - Super-A no external standard, but our own practice - metaphysically neutral.
I 81 ~
Super-Assertibility/Wright: Thesis: comic and moral truths can be considered as varieties of super-assertibility. - (s) Because everything we can learn in the future comes from our own practice, we are immune to fundamental surprises.
I 102f ~
Super-Assertibility/Wright: suitable for discourses whose standards are made by us: moral, humor.
I 115 ~~
Super-Assertibility/Field/Mackie: the T predicates for mathematics or morality cannot be interpreted in terms of the S-A. - Therefore, the super-assertible need not be true in discourse. - The difference S-A/truth goes back to this._____________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. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
Truth and Objectivity, Cambridge 1992
Wahrheit und Objektivität Frankfurt 2001
"Language-Mastery and Sorites Paradox"
Truth and Meaning, G. Evans/J. McDowell, Oxford 1976
Georg Henrik von Wright
Explanation and Understanding, New York 1971
Erklären und Verstehen Hamburg 2008
Realism, Mathematics and Modality Oxford New York 1989
Truth and the Absence of Fact Oxford New York 2001
Science without numbers Princeton New Jersey 1980
"Realism and Relativism", The Journal of Philosophy, 76 (1982), pp. 553-67
Theories of Truth, Paul Horwich, Aldershot 1994