PHIL 001 Lecture Notes - Lecture 19: Teleology, Consequentialism, Mental Reservation

• School: College of The Sequoias
• Department: Philosophy (PHIL)
• Course: PHIL 001
• Professor: cline

Document Summary

In this if the hearer does not know what sense or reference was intended, he does not know what assertion the speaker made. If the equivocator asserted anything, he asserted the falsehood. He intended the hearer to take one meaning over the other. If he asserted this - was a lie: alternately, he actually made no assertion but simply pretended to. The doctrine of equivocation requires the second proposition to be true (that not stood in this very spot). But he wants the person to pick up the untrue implication. So what makes you say that he really asserts the truth. Basically speaking where you say something but leave out an important bit which you supply mentally. This could license any lie at all similar to a child crossing fingers behind back. Rationale was that god knows what you are asserting even if the hearer does not. But deceit is a relation between you and the hearer.