Attributing conformity with a tacit rule to a non-interlocutor is always corrigible (Kripke). Articulating a tacit rule we 'discover' we have been following changes if from being tacit - and also changes the way we talk.
Imagining that before we articulated the rule we must, indeed, have been following it is to make exactly the corrigible attribution we might make to a non-interlocutor. When we move from tacit to articulated, we also move from corrigible to incorrigible.
Can we say that we moved from less clear to more clear meanings?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment