Counterevidentials

Moorean constructions are famously odd: it is infelicitous to deny that you believe what you claim to be true. But what about claiming that p, only to immediately put into question your evidence in support of p? In this paper, we identify and analyse a class of quasi-Moorean constructions, which we label counterevidentials. Although odd, counterevidentials can be accommodated as felicitous attempts to mitigate one's claim right after making it. We explore how counterevidentials differ from lexicalised mitigation operators, parentheticals, and anaphoric mitigation devices, and consider some cognate non-assertoric constructions. We conclude by exploring the implications of our analysis for theorising about linguistic responsibility, assertion, and lying.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Australasian Journal of Philosophy
Published
2024-09-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2024.2390175
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.22
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Counterevidentials

Laura Caponetto, Neri Marsili
1 citations
Australasian Journal of Philosophy
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
4.22
article

Counterevidentials

Laura Caponetto, Neri Marsili
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Moorean constructions are famously odd: it is infelicitous to deny that you believe what you claim to be true. But what about claiming that p, only to immediately put into question your evidence in support of p? In this paper, we identify and analyse a class of quasi-Moorean constructions, which we label counterevidentials. Although odd, counterevidentials can be accommodated as felicitous attempts to mitigate one's claim right after making it. We explore how counterevidentials differ from lexicalised mitigation operators, parentheticals, and anaphoric mitigation devices, and consider some cognate non-assertoric constructions. We conclude by exploring the implications of our analysis for theorising about linguistic responsibility, assertion, and lying.

Australasian Journal of PhilosophyVol. 103(2)
Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (ES), University of Cambridge (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
4.22
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.