philosophy of language
I have been thinking about a question that I would have expected to have been discussed, but I haven't come across much.
We are told that a theory of meaning for a language is important because it illuminates the question of how speakers can encounter a novel sentence and work out what it means.
Textbooks in semantics often start with this motivation. I have taught the topic this way too.
What about the task for the speaker of selecting the right sentence?
What is a political philosophy that celebrates weirdness and difference and its radical potential?
I started thinking about this because I got thrown a question during my thesis defence whether I am arguing in favour of human divergence rather than convergence (my thesis is about privacy as kind of breathing space). To be honest, I hadn’t thought about it so much in terms of political philosophy, and I’m a bit concerned about drifting into middle of the road liberalism with middle age 😀
I'm thinking of academic books, in particular.
I have a paper where I provide a new argument for a view. When I presented the paper, I often got questions which were objections to the view itself, not the specific new argument. I got some of that in a referee report too. I then added a section to the paper where I address all these objections. But now the paper is too long. I'm thinking about just removing that section. But I think that I will then get some or all of the objections from the next referees.
I'm going to review Stefano Predelli's 'Fictional Discourse' some time in the next few months.
#reading for work:
'Imagination and Convention' by Ernie Lepore and Matthew Stone
'Wolf Hall' by Hilary Mantel
What about cases where someone is sometimes published with a shortened version of their name? E.g., 'Tom' for 'Thomas'.
I try to be very careful about that myself, and always have my full name on programmes and publications even though lots of people call me by the short version.