{"id":1417,"date":"2022-02-26T15:19:08","date_gmt":"2022-02-26T15:19:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/seminar-series-in-analytic-philosophy-2021-22-session-18\/"},"modified":"2022-02-26T15:19:08","modified_gmt":"2022-02-26T15:19:08","slug":"seminar-series-in-analytic-philosophy-2021-22-session-18","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/seminar-series-in-analytic-philosophy-2021-22-session-18\/","title":{"rendered":"Seminar Series in Analytic Philosophy 2021-22, Session 18"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>From Metaphilosophy to Semantics<\/strong><br \/>\nJonathan Berg (University of Haifa)<\/p>\n<p>4 March 2022, 16:00 (Lisbon Time \u2013 GMT) | Sala Mattos Rom\u00e3o (Departamento de Filosofia)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Abstract:<\/strong> I aim to show how a commonly accepted metaphilosophical assumption has important consequences for a hotly debated issue in the philosophy of language. The seemingly innocuous metaphilosophical claim is this: <em>The Principle of Philosophical Thought Experiments<\/em> &#8211; Philosophical theories must be compatible (ceteris paribus) with the intuitions elicited by philosophical thought experiments. The controversial semantic claim it supports is this: <em>Strict Semantics<\/em> &#8211; Every disambiguated sentence has a determinate semantic content, relative to an assignment of contents to its indexical expressions. After considering each of these claims individually, I shall suggest how the first provides evidence for the second.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><em>The room has a limited number of seats. Pre-registration is required at &lt;info@lancog.com&gt; until a day before the event. Note that this is an in-person event and everyone should wear a mask.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>From Metaphilosophy to Semantics Jonathan Berg (University of Haifa) 4 March 2022, 16:00 (Lisbon Time \u2013 GMT) | Sala Mattos Rom\u00e3o (Departamento de Filosofia) Abstract: I aim to show how a commonly accepted metaphilosophical assumption has important consequences for a hotly debated issue in the philosophy of language. The seemingly innocuous metaphilosophical claim is this: [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1417","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1417","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1417"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1417\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1417"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1417"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1417"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}