The truth about fictional entities

Philosophical Quarterly 24 (94):27-36 (1974)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The usual strawsonian account of referring won't do for fictional entities. The problem is that we still don't have a sufficiently clear notion of ordinary referring, And the root of this problem is that referring is still perceived in terms of a paradigm relation of a description to an existing thing. But that relation is preceded by the more fundamental relation of thought to an object of thought, Whether real or imaginary. The conclusion reached is that fictional reference is an institutionalized partial use of ordinary referring, Parasitic on it though leading a legitimate life of its own

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,923

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Fictional truth and fictional authors.David Davies - 1996 - British Journal of Aesthetics 36 (1):43-55.
Description, Disagreement, and Fictional Names.Peter Alward - 2011 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 41 (3):423-448.
Speaking of fictional characters.Amie L. Thomasson - 2003 - Dialectica 57 (2):205–223.
A syncretistic ontology of fictional beings.Alberto Voltolini - 2013 - In T. Koblizek, P. Kot'atko & M. Pokorny (eds.), Text + Work: The Menard Case. Litteraria Pragensia. pp. 89-108.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
99 (#179,105)

6 months
17 (#161,721)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

The paradox(es) of pitying and fearing fictions.Jennifer Wilkinson - 2000 - South African Journal of Philosophy 19 (1):8-25.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references