2023/10/24 by James Ravi Kirkpatrick · 1 voice
Arts and Humanities · Computer Science · Psychology · #Philosophy and History of Science #Philosophy and Theoretical Science #Semantic Web and Ontologies
paper · doi:10.3998/phimp.4085
openalex created_date 2023/10/24 · openalex publication_date 2023/10/24 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
There is a standard quantificational view of generic sentences according to which they have a tripartite logical form involving a phonologically null generic operator called 'Gen'. Recently, a number of theorists have questioned the standard view and revived a competing proposal according to which generics involve the predication of properties to kinds. This paper offers a novel argument against the kind-predication approach on the basis of the invalidity of Generic Excluded Middle, a principle according to which any sentence of the form ⌜Either Fs are G or Fs are not G⌝ is true. I argue that the kind-predication approach erroneously predicts that GEM is valid, and that it can only avoid this conclusion by either collapsing into a form of the quantificational analysis or otherwise garnering unpalatable metaphysical commitments. I also show that, while the quantificational approach does not validate GEM as a matter of logical form, the principle may be validated on certain semantic analyses of the generic operator, and so, such theories should be rejected.