Skip to main content
Log in

Why Propositions Cannot be Sets of Truth-supporting Circumstances

  • Published:
Journal of Philosophical Logic Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

No semantic theory satisfying certain natural constraints can identify the semantic contents of sentences (the propositions they express), with sets of circumstances in which the sentences are true–no matter how fine-grained the circumstances are taken to be. An objection to the proof is shown to fail by virtue of conflating model-theoretic consequence between sentences with truth-conditional consequence between the semantic contents of sentences. The error underlines the impotence of distinguishing semantics, in the sense of a truth-based theory of logical consequence, and semantics, in the sense of a theory of meaning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Scott Soames.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Soames, S. Why Propositions Cannot be Sets of Truth-supporting Circumstances. J Philos Logic 37, 267–276 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-007-9069-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-007-9069-8

Key words

Navigation