|Truth-conditional semantics: truth-conditional semantics assume that the meaning of sentences can be determined by determining their truth value ("true" or "false"). It is assumed that the sentence components contribute to the meaning of the entire sentence, and the links ("and", "or", etc.) have the meaning which results from the logical truth tables. An example for a non-truth-conditional semantics is the conditional role semantics. See also compositionality, Frege-Principle, truth values, analyticity/syntheticity, understanding, semantics._____________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. |
QuineVsEvans/DummettVsEvans: Importance not from truth conditions. - Instead: proximal theory: stimulus patterns (evidence) instead of objects. This is simplistic, since every meaning theory must relate meaning to truth and to evidence.
K. Glüer, Davidson zur Einführung, 1993
Glüer II 18
Meaning/meaning theory: A. truth conditional semantics (Davidson) and - B. Verification theories of meaning. (Dummett, Putnam, Habermas). - All Verification theories use the verifiability of the assumed relationship - a) strongest version: a sentence understands who knows that it is true - b) weaker: understanding bound to knowledge of the verification procedures. (Dummett, Vienna Circle) - or acceptability conditions: Putnam and Habermas) - according to them someone understands a sentence, who knows how to verify or when it is accepted as true._____________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.
Der Mythos des Subjektiven Stuttgart 1993
Handlung und Ereignis Frankfurt 1990
Wahrheit und Interpretation Frankfurt 1990
D. Davidson Zur Einführung Hamburg 1993