 Above we saw that for Hanks, predication endows propositions with an inherent element of judgment or assertion. Predicating a property of an object commits the predicator to the object having that property. For Hanks, she did something false if it doesn’t. But this raises a problem for him. In disjunctive, negated, conditional propositions and others, embedded propositions do not have assertive force. They aren’t asserted. But if these embedded propositions inherently have an assertoric or judgmental element, how can this be? To address this Hanks claims that ‘or’, ‘if’ and ‘not’ create cancellation contexts. Since e.g. ‘or’ creates a cancellation context on Hanks’ view, in uttering the following sentence I fail to assert that Trump is a demagogue: