Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data
Cresswell, M.J.
 
Books on Amazon
Situation Semantics I 63
Situation Semantics/Barwise/Perry: possible worlds (poss.w.) are too big to explain what the speaker of a sentence knows. Possible World: complete possible situations.
CresswellvsBarwise: Situations need only be partial in the sense that they are small possible worlds.
---
I 69
CresswellVsBarweise/Perry: disjunction: their construction requires that situations are considered as possible worlds: E.g. I am at home or at the university: as a proposition incomplete, because both made true. - The situation can only be one of the two. - making true: the total (disjunction) does not have to be made true by an alternative, because it can also be made true by another alternative.
---
I 72
Situations seem incomplete. (E.g. Does the dog bark loudly or quietly?) - But they are not as incomplete as propositions.
---
I 71
Problem: Total situation: Machine is working (shows red or green). - still contradiction: is the situation described by a or by b? If the signal was neither showing red nor green, the incompleteness would be too radical.
---
I 73
Incomplete/situation/Barwise/Perry: E.g. naked infinitives with "see". Joe saw Fred coming in and Sally was smoking or not smoking. - Cresswell: so everything possible - but then possible world - Everything that can be a possible world is a possible world. Possible worlds do not have to be large, they can be as small as situations at Barwise/Perry - different: aspect/Hintikka: (= incompleteness of possible world): all facts about who slept during the lecture. - CresswellVsHintikka: we do not want lists, these are metaphysical here. - Solution/Cresswell. "Everything that interests us in the situation". ((s)so lists after all.) Thus the truth of the propositions can be determined.
---
I 74
Definition essentially incomplete/Cresswell: is a situation when it only needs to be part of an accumulation of situations (disjunction) - CresswellVsBarwise: but this does not work with naked infinitives with "see": E.g. of "Ralph saw Ortcutt or Hortcutt hide the letter" - at "Ralph saw... or saw... ". (This is not a that-sentence!) - This is not possible if seeing should be a relation between subject and situation - ((s) Then only one of the two.)
---
I 77
Situation Semantics/CresswellVs: knows only one kind of entities (situations). - instead: possible world semantics: three types: 1. possible world, single and complete (assessed with regard to truth) 2. Propositions: classes of possible worlds, are in logical relations and are the meanings of sentences in a context - 3. Individuals (individuals) among them events. - Situations/Cresswell: can be considered as one of each of these kind of entities.

Cr I
M. J. Cresswell
Semantical Essays (Possible worlds and their rivals) Dordrecht Boston 1988

Cr II
M. J. Cresswell
Structured Meanings Cambridge Mass. 1984


> Counter arguments against Cresswell
> Counter arguments in relation to Situation Semantics



back to list view | > Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-03-24