Philosophical Studies· 2026Q1
Replies to a fellow expressivist and two fellow inferentialists
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
The authors defend their novel 'inferential expressivism' framework, resisting pressures to fully adopt either expressivism or inferentialism, and positioning it as a unifying theory for both.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- The paper addresses comments from three specific philosophers (Dickie, Chrisman, Tiefensee) on the book 'Reasoning with Attitude'.
- The authors' core aim is to defend their 'inferential expressivism' framework.
- They resist being categorized solely as expressivists or inferentialists.
- The framework is presented as a viable 'home' for thinkers from both expressivist and inferentialist traditions.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract We respond to the comments by Imogen Dickie, Matthew Chrisman and Christine Tiefensee for a book symposium on our Reasoning with Attitude . Our commentators attempt to pull us further into either expressivism or into inferentialism. Here, we attempt to resist either pull and further establish our inferential expressivism as a home for both expressivists and inferentialists.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Philosophical Studies, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Philosophy
PhilosophyArts and Humanities