tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31003419.post115851789977675406..comments2023-11-02T07:50:38.614-05:00Comments on Lemmings: Mini-HiatusBrit Brogaardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17944929071368873218noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31003419.post-1159161167726741392006-09-25T00:12:00.000-05:002006-09-25T00:12:00.000-05:00Aidan: Yeah, I was considering giving people a 5-m...Aidan: Yeah, I was considering giving people a 5-min break after the first two days but decided against it.<BR/><BR/>Jared: yes, your example fits the contextualist's purposes better. But the problem is that they cannot (easily) account for the felicity of the other example.Brit Brogaardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17944929071368873218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31003419.post-1158845829600663202006-09-21T08:37:00.000-05:002006-09-21T08:37:00.000-05:00Question: In the "retraction problem," I get a hu...Question: In the "retraction problem," I get a hunch that the following might better represent a contextual exchange (roles of you and me reversed):<BR/><BR/>You: ...So, you see, I'm not *sure* that my car is in the driveway.<BR/><BR/>Me: But a few hours ago you said you knew it was there.<BR/><BR/>You: I *might have been wrong*. I didn't know *for sure*.<BR/><BR/>In this revised example, you don't mean different things by know (according to contextualism) but you tack on a quantity of "sureness."<BR/><BR/>Or does this revision only highlight the involvement of a "judge parameter"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31003419.post-1158735385596404362006-09-20T01:56:00.000-05:002006-09-20T01:56:00.000-05:00Man, that's one long talk!Man, that's one long talk!Aidanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16164506970522004673noreply@blogger.com