"Reasoning, Reason Relations, and Semantics" Robert Brandom at Universite de Montreal January 2022.

I sketch a pragmatics-first order of semantic explanation. It begins with an account of the practical attitudes of doxastic acceptance and rejection, and seeks to understand in terms of them the propositional contents expressed by the declarative sentences used in the speech acts of assertion and denial that manifest those attitudes publicly. In the first step of the argument, reason relations of implication and incompatibility are found to be implicit in reasoning practices. In the second step, semantic contents are understood as roles sentence play in those reason relations. Interpretations are offered of two sorts of semantics in these ultimately pragmatic terms: Kit Fine’s truthmaker semantics (relying on work by Ulf Hlobil), and Dan Kaplan’s implicational phase-space semantics. Viewing both from a bilateral normative pragmatic perspective (inspired by Greg Restall and Dave Ripley) reveals a surprising isomorphism between these very different approaches to semantics.
Text of paper and much more available at sites.pitt.edu/~rbrandom

[@chhhhhris]

farmer bob! Gotta add this 1 to the rare bob collection!

[@ryansimonelli6831]

Great stuff, Bob!

[@BillyMcBride]

I thank you, Professor Brandom, and I wonder about the manner how Donald Davidson accepted or rejected any claims? Thank you.

[@BillyMcBride]

@dostoyevsky1222 Davidson's Principle of Charity inspires a descent forward, and longer on toward an understanding I have of a dream, a smug life where with wisdom we view other's perspectives as coherent before we reject them, or even ever strive to do so.

[@findbridge1790]

absurd; a complete dead end, or rather the final running into the weeds at the end of the dead end [driven into by Frege]; the only thing preventing the vehicle ending up in the river is that it has run out of gas. lol

[@hss12661]

No one even knows what do you mean.