Assertion and Denial, Commitment and Entitlement, and Incompatibility (and some consequence)

March 2008

“Assertion and Denial, Commitment and Entitlement, and Incompatibility (and some consequence),” Studies in Logic 1 (2008), 26–36.

In this short paper, I compare and contrast the kind of symmetricalist treatment of negation favoured in different ways by Huw Price (in “Why ‘Not’?”) and by me (in “Multiple Conclusions”) with Robert Brandom’s analysis of scorekeeping in terms of commitment, entitlement and incompatibility.

Both kinds of account provide a way to distinguish the inferential significance of “A” and “A is warranted” in terms of a subtler analysis of our practices: on the one hand, we assert as well as deny; on the other, by distingushing downstream commitments from upstream entitlements and the incompatibility definable in terms of these. In this note I will examine the connections between these different approaches.

---

 download pdf

You are welcome to download and read this paper. I welcome any feedback you'd like to share. Please check the final published version if you wish to cite it. Thanks.

← Earlier / Archive / Later →