| |
| | A QUESTION FOR EXPRESSIVISTS |
 | | Paul Horwich argues, drawing on his minimalist view of truth, that it follows from the point, granted by expressivists and their foes alike, that ethical sentences are meaningful, grammatically declarative ones, that they are truth apt, are truth assessable, or have truth conditions (for our purposes we need not distinguish these three notions). |
 | | It would, that is, be too quick to point out that indicative conditionals are sentences we produce as a result of our learned mastery of a natural language, and then conclude without further ado that they have truth conditions on the ground that they must, being convention-governed, express beliefs. |
 | | Incidentally, it might be argued that the reason `boo' and `hurrah' lack truth conditions is not that the conventions governing their use are not `good' enough, but rather that they belong with commands and recommendations. |
| philrsss.anu.edu.au /people-defaults/fcj/Expressivism.html (5730 words) |
|