Sandro Balletta

In this paper, we suggest a strategy for modelling cognitive context within a truth‐conditional semantics, using Asher's model of predication. This allows us to introduce the notion of type presupposition intended as a lexical constraint to the composition of the truth‐conditional content. More specifically, we suggest that this model of predication produces a notion of truth‐conditional meaning where the cognitive context fixes a set of lexical restrictions and forced modifications. We conclude that this model might offer an intermediate position between Minimalism and Contextualism: an account that provides intuitive truth conditions within a formal semantic theory.

What are words? How should words be individuated? Such questions set the agenda for the metaphysics of words. Unfortunately, misunderstandings are piling up in this field. Although the discussion between Kaplan, Cappelen, Hawthorne, Lepore and others has given rise to interesting insights into many aspects of words, I contend that the debate is highly compromised by a lack of clarity about the questions in the first place. The purpose of this article is to partially clarify the debate on the metaphysics of words by examining the very nature of the questions to be addressed. I shall differentiate three inquiries about words and shall provide explanations of why misunderstandings can and do arise. I claim that, in so doing, we may put the debate back on solid footing in order to rethink the real nature of words.

The aim of the paper is resurrecting the “Demarcation Problem”, which was considered dead in a paper written by Larry Laudan in 1983. I will go through the analysis of Imre Lakatos’ thought, which represents the most mature synthesis between the fallibilism of science and the rationality of the demarcation attitude. Lakatos’ philosophical trick is directed to acknowledge the inclinations of the contemporary philosophers, to grasp the best they can offer, and to propose a more suitable philosophy of science. He follows the middle path between dogmatism and skepticism: the favorite position in order to safeguard the phenomena suggesting a rational unity of the science in an “anarchic” historical period.