Work #1554 · Mid-career period

Expression and Meaning

Searle's 1979 essay collection — speech-act theory and the literal vs metaphorical, indirect, and fictional uses of language

John Searle · 1979 · English · Philosophical essay collection

Tradition: Analytic philosophy of language / speech-act theory

Searle's 1979 essays extending speech-act theory to indirect speech, metaphor, fiction, and literal meaning

Published by Cambridge University Press in 1979, 'Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts' collects Searle's seven essays extending the 'Speech Acts' (1969) programme. Topics include a revised taxonomy of illocutionary acts, indirect speech acts, the logical status of fictional discourse, the relation of literal to metaphorical meaning, and the place of meaning intentions in language.

Author

Editions cited

  • Expression and Meaning (Cambridge University Press, 1979)

School Embodiments

Philosophy of Language · 30%
Analytic Metaphysics / Logical Atomism · 18%
Pragmatism · 16%
Naturalism · 14%
Realism · 12%
Structuralism · 10%
Analytic Philosophy · 8%

Mid-career systematic statement of Searlean speech-act theory.

"A taxonomy of illocutionary acts." (Expression and Meaning, ch. 1)

Analytic-metaphysical underpinning of meaning.

"Meaning is constitutively connected to speaker intention." (Expression and Meaning, ch. 5)

Pragmatic theory of indirect speech and conversational implicature.

"Indirect speech acts depend on shared pragmatic background." (Expression and Meaning, ch. 2)

Naturalistic framework for language.

"Language is part of natural human action." (Expression and Meaning)
Realism 12%

Realism about meaning, illocution, and reference.

"Meaning is a genuine feature of utterances, not a mere construct." (Expression and Meaning)

Structural account of illocutionary classification.

"Five basic illocutionary types — assertive, directive, commissive, expressive, declarative." (Expression and Meaning, ch. 1)

Analytic-philosophical tradition.

Internal Tensions

Mid-career systematic statement of Searle's speech-act philosophy of language.

I. Time

1979.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Grain: Continuous Freedom: NDet Traversability: Linear Direction: Uni-directional Dimensionality: One

II. Space

Berkeley.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Curvature: Curved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

III. Matter

Seven-essay collection.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

IV. Observer

Mid-Searle.

Attributes
Time Instance: Single Space Instance: Single Knowledge Extent: Immediate Knowledge Retainment: Total Physicality: Embodied Agency: Active Number: Plural Metaphysical Agency: Impersonal

V. Energy

Programmatic speech-act energies.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dispersibility: Irreversible

VI. Information

Single volume of essays.

Attributes
Ontological Status: Substantival Cosmic Conservation: Conserved Personal Conservation: Non-conserved Granularity: Continuous

Personas that cite this work

John Searle

Personas with the nearest attribute fingerprint

Historical figures whose own classification on the same six-dimensional grid lands closest to this work's. Computed by attribute-agreement on coordinates both address.

Computed school proximity

The work's attribute fingerprint scored against all schools using the same quiz scorer. Useful as a sanity check on the hand-curated embodiments above.

How Expression and Meaning resolves each dilemma

31 resolved positions across 4 dimensions · 26 unaligned.

Each dimension is sorted so minority positions come first. Mainstream positions are folded into an expandable list.

Time · 9 dilemmas, all mainstream
Matter · 7 dilemmas, all mainstream
Observer · 37 dilemmas, all mainstream
Could causation work backwards? Causation runs one way — the arrow of time is real and structural. 68% Is the asymmetry between memory and anticipation a real feature of time, or just of us? The asymmetry is real because time itself has a real direction. 68% Is the arrow of time a real feature of the cosmos, or only of how we describe it? The arrow is real and structural; the asymmetry isn't an artifact of description. 68% Is environmental damage ever truly permanent? Damage is real and permanent on the relevant timescales. There is no recovery; there is only limitation. 66% Can a civilization recover from collapse? Civilizational complexity is hard to build and easy to lose; recovery is at best partial. 66% Does the second law of thermodynamics mean something morally? Entropy is what time is. The moral weight, if any, is the weight of working against the current. 66% When does a person begin? A person exists from conception — when a new being comes into existence. 54% What is marriage? Marriage has a given form — it’s a kind of thing we recognize, not make. 54% What is our place in nature? Active in a real nature — we cultivate, steward, transform. 48% Should we colonize space? Cultivating worlds beyond Earth is the next form of stewardship. 48% Is genetic engineering of food stewardship or domination? Genetic modification is cultivation by other means. 48% Should we trust expert testimony when we can't verify it? Trust expertise whose conclusions a competent mind can in principle reproduce. 32% Is religious revelation a real source of knowledge? Revelation is evaluable by reason — and not above it. 32% Does an LLM 'know' the things it correctly produces? An LLM can produce correct outputs but not reason to them; useful, not knowing. 32% Are coincidences ever more than coincidence? Are the dead morally present to the living? Are there indivisible units of experience? Can prayer for someone far away affect them? Could a fetal brain organoid in a petri dish be conscious? Could an AI have a mind that matters? Do animals have moral standing comparable to humans? Does environmental harm in another country bind me morally? Does history have a direction or meaning? Does meditation reveal something genuinely timeless? Does prayer change God's mind? How is knowledge of reality produced? If a teleporter copied and destroyed you, would you have survived? Is divine omniscience compatible with human freedom? Is memory stored or reconstructed? Is reality fundamentally digital? Is salvation, liberation, or fulfillment individual or communal? Is the late-stage dementia patient still the person their spouse married? Is truth universal, tradition-bound, situated, or constructed? What happens to "you" when you die? What kind of religious-theological authority does the tradition recognize? What makes someone the same person over time? Who is the moral primary — the individual, the community, the cosmos, the class, or the species?
Information · 4 dilemmas, all mainstream
← #1553 Parts of Animals All Works #1555 Minds, Brains, and Programs →