I have provided an example that hopefully highlights what I am trying to articulate.
Person A believes that Something can be bad or good, but not both (XOR)
Person B believes that Something can be bad and/or good (OR)
If X is deemed bad, and subsequently deemed good by the same source, Person A believes that the source has stated a contradiction, whereas Person B believes that it is simultaneously good and bad (albeit in different respects, or bad at t=0 and good at t=1, et cetera)
Because the way Person A and Person B interpret a statement differs, is the way they differ described by Pragmatics as opposed to the other fields of linguistics?
Below is the previous abandoned example.
Statement(S): Person A is bad, and Person A is good.
Evaluation System 1 (ES1) has axiom: "All subject complement's describe identical respects of Subject. (Within a single sentence)"
Evaluation System 2 (ES2) has axiom: " All subject complement's do not necessarily describe identical respects of a Subject. (within a single sentence)"
Inputting S into ES1, yields - terms "bad" and "good" describe identical respects of Person A, thus the statement is false.
Inputting S into ES2, yields - terms "bad" and "good" do not necessarily describe identical respects of Person A, thus is permissible, not false (unless Person A is further qualified, in other clauses or sentences.)
ES1 and ES2 differ in axioms used, and thus evaluate the statement differently, are then evaluation axioms to be considered as relating to Pragmatics?
(Apologies if I, in creating the question, used vocabulary in an inappropriate manner relative to their use in other well-established fields of linguistics.)