Banno is applying the common linguistic meaning of proposition and creative soul is talking about the philosophical term. Both right but talking about different things. — Benkei

We can be short about this one. Banno is applying the common linguistic meaning of proposition and creative soul is talking about the philosophical term. Both right but talking about different things. Next! — Benkei

Others assume that beliefs are real mental furniture, or real behavioural or systemic dispositions. Or real something. — bongo fury

the sentence "the present king of France is bald" does express a proposition -- that there exists exactly one x such that x is presently king of France and x is bald -- and that proposition is false, because there is no x that is presently king of France. — Pfhorrest

Pragmatics is neither syntax nor semantics. — Pfhorrest

Pragmatics is neither syntax nor semantics. — Pfhorrest

Yes, so it's not enough that "the present king of France is bald" is grammatical and meaningful. There also needs to be a context such that it is evaluable. — Andrew M

but that doesn't make the sentence have some kind of indeterminate truth value, because its strictly logical content can still be evaluated to false. — Pfhorrest

We are apt to fancy we are talking about sentences and expressions when we are talking about the uses of sentences and expressions.

This is what Russell does. Generally, as against Russell, I shall say this. Meaning (in at least one important sense) is a function of the sentence or expression ; mentioning and referring and truth or falsity, are functions of the use of the sentence or expression. [italics mine] — On Referring, p327 - Peter Strawson

In the same way that "all of my children are dead" pragmatically implies that I have had some nonzero number of children, all of which have died, but strictly logically equates to "there does not exist any x such that x is my child and x is not dead", which is true because there does not exist any x such that x is my child. — Pfhorrest

If your sense of the proposition is like: so long as there exists a string of words which states the belief content at some point in time *** then the belief content is propositional because it can be stated, then yes of course it's propositional.

But if your sense of the proposition has the modality associated with that italicised "can" be temporal - IE there are some beliefs in some organism, or some beliefs at some points in time which cannot be stated at that* time, then no of course belief contents aren't always propositional.

I do not expect creativesoul and @Banno to ever argue this crucial point regarding the modality of expression of belief statements in their debate, so I expect it to be a clash of worldviews without any interfacing - an exchange characterised by attempting to shift frames of interpretation for belief than regarding any thematisation of belief ** — fdrake

we normally use a sentence to assert something about a (referring) subject. — Andrew M

It's just not truth apt, right? — frank

"Snow" or snow? — bongo fury

On a presuppositional view, one cannot evaluate a sentence as true or false when the subject term has no referent. For a programming analogy, to attempt to evaluate it is like attempting to dereference a null pointer. — Andrew M

if (object.method) {do stuff} else {error handling}

if (france.king.hairstyle == "bald") {polish his head} else {do nothing}

Snow. If I assert that the snow outside is white, then I am (purportedly) referring to snow outside and saying something about it. If there is no snow outside then that is a failure of reference. Hence, on Strawson's view, my assertion is neither true nor false (i.e., it's not truth apt). — Andrew M

Do be careful with computational logic. It doesn't work the same as propositional logic, because instructions are not statements. "A= A+1" Contradiction as statement, simple commonplace instruction — unenlightened

snow outside — Andrew M

(referring) subject. — Andrew M

Language is not needed for the event to happen, — creativesoul

nor is it [language] needed to believe that a mouse ran behind the tree. — creative soul

So

if (france.king.hairstyle == "bald") {polish his head} else {do nothing}

will result in nothing being done, because france.king.hairstyle is a null reference (since france has no such property as king) and so comparisons against it universally return false. — Pfhorrest

Plus the sentence could become truth apt (if we grant that sentences can be) if you named your dog 'The present king of France'

Still have to look to use to discern meaning. The meaning is the proposition (kind of). — frank

Asserting that the snow outside is white isnt useful, as it is basically redundant information -as if snow could be another color. — Harry Hindu

(referring) subject.
— Andrew M

was a typo? — bongo fury

That's how it works, and drawing and maintaining the distinction between believing a mouse ran behind the tree, and believing that a description of those events is true does not in any way, shape, or form deny that some statements are about the way things are. — creativesoul

-as if snow could be another color. — Harry Hindu

A state of affairs is, at least, like a proposition. But perhaps different in the sense that no-one needs to have stated or believed it. Presumably mice ran behind trees before humans emerged to notice that kind of thing. — Andrew M

States of affairs are a bit tricky. They can contain hidden perspectives like "behind X". — Marchesk

Never heard of yellow snow? You can certainly have polluted snow which is brown or black. You could also pour food coloring on it. Snow cones are a thing.

It's like saying, "Water is H2O", which is only true in the pure sense. Water often has other things mixed in. It's something to keep in mind in these philosophical discussions. The real world is messy — Marchesk