[lit-ideas] Re: Grice on the disimplicatures of Popper's objective knowledge (Was: "It is known that..."
- From: "Luigi Speranza" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "jlsperanza" for DMARC)
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2016 18:44:36 -0400
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 24, 2016, at 6:10 PM, Donal McEvoy (Redacted sender "donalmcevoyuk"
for DMARC) <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Well, the answers are of course Griceian.>
Probably only if you're Griceist.
We are considering the exchange:
RITCHIE: One of the students told me I had this big tear in the back of my
trousers. Why didn't anyone of you told me? You tho't I was performing a view?
The disimplicature of silence is obvious:
Grice discusses:
A: We're going to miss Agatha and Rupert.
B: We're going to miss Agatha.
By passing in silence, as Witters says,
i. We're going to miss Rupert.
B implicates that he is NOT precisely going to miss Rupert.
In Ritchie's case B's silence implicates
ii. Fun.
Cheers,
Speranza
You know your trouser has a big tear, don't you,
prof?------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
