Article published In: Pragmatics
Vol. 32:4 (2022) ► pp.518–536
Shifting perspective on indexicals
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 24 February 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.21007.bow
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.21007.bow
Abstract
The debate over the meanings of indexical expressions has relied heavily on the method of counterexamples. This paper challenges that method by showing that purported counterexamples can often be explained away by appeal to perspective shifts. For these counterexamples to establish anything about indexical reference, we must identify the conditions under which theorists can legitimately appeal to perspective shifts. Some tests for semantic content are considered and it is argued that none of them can tell us when appeal to perspective shift is admissible. The paper then considers how we should proceed if we become convinced that there is no way to identify the content of indexical expressions, offering reasons in favour of a nihilist conception of character over an epistemicist or pluralist conception.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Kaplan’s semantics for indexicals
- 3.Reference and perspective
- 4.Identifying semantic content
- 5.Nihilism, pluralism, and epistemicism
- 6.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (42)
Åkerman, Jonas. 2015. “The Communication Desideratum and Theories of Indexical Reference.” Mind & Language 301: 474–99.
. 2017. “Indexicals and Reference-Shifting: Towards a Pragmatic Approach.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 951: 117–152.
Bowker, Mark. 2019. “Underdetermination, Domain Restriction, and Theory Choice.” Mind & Language 34 (2): 205–220.
Cohen, Jonathan. 2013. “Indexicality and the Puzzle of the Answering Machine.” Journal of Philosophy 1101: 5–32.
Corazza, Eros, Willaim Fish, and Jonathan Gorvett. 2002. “Who is I?” Philosophical Studies 1071: 1–21.
Dodd, Dylan, and Paula Sweeney. 2010. “Indexicals and Utterance Production.” Philosophical Studies 1501: 331–348.
Enoch, David. 2007. “Epistemicism and Nihilism About Vagueness: What’s the Difference?” Philosophical Studies 1331: 285–311.
Gómez-Torrente, M. 2020. Roads to Reference: An Essay on Reference Fixing in Natural Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kaplan, David. 1989a. “Demonstratives: An Essay on the Semantics, Logic, Metaphysics, and Epistemology of Demonstrative and Other Indexicals.” In Themes from Kaplan, ed. by J. Almog, J. Perry, and H. Wettstein, 481–563. New York: Oxford University Press.
. 1989b. “Afterthoughts.” In Themes from Kaplan, ed. by J. Almog, J. Perry, and H. Wettstein, 565–614. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kripke, Saul. 1977. “Speaker’s Referent and Semantic Referent.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 21: 255–276.
Michaelson, Eliot, and Jonathan Cohen. 2013. “Indexicality and the Paradox of the Answering Machine.” Philosophy Compass 81: 580–592.
Montminy, Martin. 2010. “Context and Communication: A Defense of Intentionalism.” Journal of Pragmatics 421: 2910–2918.
. 2015. “Character, Impropriety, and Success: A Unified Account of Indexicals.” Mind & Language 201: 1–21.
Perry, John. 2003. “Predelli’s Threatening Note: Contexts, Utterances, and Tokens in the Philosophy of Language.” Journal of Pragmatics 351: 373–387.
. 2006. “Using Indexicals.” In The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Language, ed. by M. Devitt, and R. Hanley, 314–34. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Rabern, Brian and Derek Ball. 2019. “Monsters and the Theoretical Role of Context.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 98 (2): 392–416.
Radelescu, Alexandru. 2018. “The Difference Between Indexicals and Demonstratives.” Synthese 1951: 3173–3196.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Martin, Samantha A.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
