BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//wp-events-plugin.com//7.4.0.1//EN
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:469@ub.edu
DTSTART:20140205T130000Z
DTEND:20140205T150000Z
DTSTAMP:20250915T195154Z
URL:https://www.ub.edu/grc_logos/activities/retractions/
SUMMARY:Retractions
DESCRIPTION:Retraction and disagreement data have been used to motivate rel
 ativist  accounts of certain types of claims. Among these figure epistemic
  modals\,  knowledge attributions\, or personal taste claims. On the relat
 ivist proposal\,  sentences like &ldquo\;the ice cream might be in the fri
 dge&rdquo\; or &ldquo\;Pocoyo is funny&rdquo\; only  get assigned a truth-
 value relative to contexts of utterance\, indices of  evaluation\, and con
 texts of assessment. The novelty are the contexts of  assessment. Retracti
 ons play a crucial role in the argument for assessment  relativism\, becau
 se a retraction is supposed to be obligatory. Assessment  relativism would
  accommodate this: A speaker must retract a previously made  assertion if 
 it is not true at the context of assessment. If retractions were  not obli
 gatory\, there would be no normative difference between assessment  relati
 vism and non-indexical contextualism. This paper has to goals. The first  
 is to offer a review of several objections to the obligatoriness of retrac
 tions.  A second\, is to suggest how a contextualist (indexical or not) ca
 n accommodate  permissible retractions. This will satisfy a further aim\, 
 which is to undermine  the claim that assessment relativism is normatively
  distinct.&nbsp\;
CATEGORIES:Seminar
LOCATION:Seminari de Filosofia UB
X-APPLE-STRUCTURED-LOCATION;VALUE=URI;X-ADDRESS=C. Montalegre\, 6-8\, Barce
 lona\, 08001\, Spain;X-APPLE-RADIUS=100;X-TITLE=Seminari de Filosofia UB:g
 eo:0,0
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR