Does it really matter?

This sentence expresses a false proposition.

Alright. Now what is the proposition that is false

Now do you see?

The proposition is that the proposition is false.

See what?

What proposition are we speaking about in the sentence "This sentence is false"?

What proposition are we speaking about in the sentence "This sentence has five words"? Obviously not the same proposition but you can answer me, can't you? If so, use that same method and apply it to your own question.

In the example, "There are seven words in this sentence", I am inclined to believe that there is a proposition being made. First, as noted, yes, I think it is reasonable to assume that "this sentence" refers to the sentence in which the phrase is in. And it seems to me that it is either true or false that a sentence has seven words; there is meaning here.

However, the problem with "This sentence is false", is, I think, that we do not attribute the properties true or false to sentences. We attribute the properties true or false to propositions. So, I do not think a proposition is being made, and I'm not sure the sentence is meaningful.

The truth of a sentence is a function of the truth of the proposition expressed by a sentence.

I'm not sure how you don't see that.

Interesting. So sentences are truth-bearers?

Does "This sentence expresses a proposition." express a proposition? If so, is it true or false? If not, why not? It seems to. Doesn't it?

I don't do well with that term. It's been explained to me before, but I forget what it is.

I agree that all propositions are either true or false, but many propositions aren't necessary truths (or falsities); they are contingent truths (and falsities).

Propositions:
Meaningful propositions: possible
Meaningless propositions: TBA
Cognitively meaningful propositions: possible
Cognitively meaningless propositions: not possible

Meaningful (but not cognitively meaningful) propositions: not possible

Thanks. I was wondering what I was.

I will add that never is it the case that a sentence is true or false if it does not express a proposition. The only reason I would ever call a sentence true or false is if the sentence expressed a proposition--all of which [propositions, that is] are true or false.

Why would I ever call a sentence true or false at all? It feels right. It doesn't seem that I'm committing a category error when I do so.

I want to know if it's techncially the case that sentences are true or false even though they are only derivately true--dependent on whether the propositions expressed by them are true or false. I think the answer is yes.

Here's my position:

Sentences that express true propositions are true sentences, sentences that express false propositions are false sentences, and sentences that don't express propositions at all are neither true sentences nor false sentences.

I don't do well with that term. It's been explained to me before, but I forget what it is.

This is how I see understand the position:
A sentence is true iff it expresses exactly one proposition and that proposition is true.

The phrase " expresses exactly one proposition" seems to avoid the ambiguity problem that I wrote about earlier.

Well, a truth-bearer is something that must be true or false (there is no third option). The best example is the proposition, but I do know that there are other views, as Emil always notes, which regard things like sentence as truth-bearers. The truth-bearer sentence view makes no sense to me, since I know that a sentence can have meaning without being true or false. And I know you agree with that (as you just noted it).

I just think we ought to call propositions true or false, and be very wary not to confuse propositions with sentences. If we attribute the properties true or false to sentences, it seems to confuse things. I'd rather consider sentences meaningful or meaningless.

Why exactly one proposition? What about a sentence like, "The chemical composition of water is H20, and the element hydrogen has an atomic number of 1". It is a compound sentence, but a sentence nonetheless. And it expresses two propositions. So, why wouldn't this be considered a true sentence?

But when I click on the link, nothing comes up.

I seem to recall Ken talking about some propositions that are neither true or false. It was in relation to fiction.

No, it expresses one proposition and that proposition is a compound proposition (not surprising).

Must be?

I agree that all propositions are either true or false, but many propositions aren't necessary truths (or falsities); they are contingent truths (and falsities).



Sentences:
Meaningful sentences: possible
Meaningless sentences: possible
Cognitively meaningful sentences: possible
Cognitively meaningless sentences: possible

Meaningful (but not cognitively meaningful) sentences: possible

Propositions:
Meaningful propositions: possible
Meaningless propositions: TBA
Cognitively meaningful propositions: possible
Cognitively meaningless propositions: not possible

Meaningful (but not cognitively meaningful) propositions: not possible

For some reason the link was broken. I fixed it now.

Does it really matter?

This sentence expresses a false proposition.

Yes, "This sentence expresses a proposition" expresses a proposition. The proposition is that that sentence expresses a proposition. And that proposition is false, since the sentence does not express a proposition.

Could you give me an example? That seems wild to me. Propositions tell us something about the world, and things about the world are either true or false.

A sentence like "Mickey Mouse wears white gloves", I think can fairly be translated to, "The cartoon character Mickey Mouse is depicted as wearing white gloves". But if the person sincerely meant the real Mickey Mouse by the former sentence, it would of course not be expressing a proposition (since Mickey Mouse does not exist).

I don't see how. It expresses two propositions. That is, two different facts about the world. That two propositions are expressed by a compound sentence, doesn't mean that the two propositions conjoin into a compound proposition.