The nature and structure of content by Jeffrey C. King [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Analysis 69 (2):365-367 (2009)
The Nature and Structure of Content is a lucid, stimulating and occasionally frustrating book about the metaphysics of propositions. King is a realist about propositions, and he assumes throughout that a viable theory must individuate them more finely than sets of possible worlds. His aim in the first three chapters is to motivate an account in which propositions have constituent structure, akin to and dependent on the structure of the sentences that express them. The following chapters defend the use of propositions in semantics against a variety of objections, and in the seventh and final chapter King presents a new solution to the old paradox of analysis. With little exception, the arguments in these later chapters are rigorous and compelling, but being largely independent of the account developed in the preceding chapters, the book feels somewhat disjointed. Here I pass over these provocative vignettes to deal with the main action, the account of propositions.According to tradition, propositions are things expressed by declarative sentences, bearers of alethic and modal properties, and objects of belief and other psychological attitudes. The idea that propositions have constituent structure, mirroring somehow the sentences that express them, comes down to us from Frege . More recently, the idea has been adopted by Kaplan and figures prominently in ‘Russellian’ semantic theories of Salmon , Soames and others. The big debate in recent philosophy of language focuses on the identity of propositional constituents: are they senses, as in Frege? Or the things linguistic expressions designate, as in Russellian theories? Though his sympathies plainly lie with the Russellians, King remains officially neutral on this dispute, focusing instead on the question of structure itself.Structured propositions are often represented as …
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Paul Benacerraf (1965). What Numbers Could Not Be. Philosophical Review 74 (1):47-73.
Richard K. Larson & Peter Ludlow (1993). Interpreted Logical Forms. Synthese 95 (3):305 - 355.
Citations of this work BETA
Jeffrey C. King (2009). Questions of Unity. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 109 (1pt3):257-277.
Similar books and articles
Derk Pereboom (1995). Conceptual Structure and the Individuation of Content. Philosophical Perspectives 9:401-428.
Jeffrey King & Jason Stanley (2005). Semantics, Pragmatics, and the Role of Semantic Content. In Zoltán Szabó (ed.), Semantics Versus Pragmatics. Oxford University Press 111--164.
Karsten R. Stueber (2006). How to Structure a Social Theory?: A Critical Response to Anthony King’s the Structure of Social Theory. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 36 (1):95-104.
Harry Deutsch (2008). Review of Jeffrey C. King, The Nature and Structure of Content. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2008 (5).
Jeffrey C. King (2007). The Nature and Structure of Content. Oxford University Press.
G. Marti & D. Zeman (2010). The Nature and Structure of Content, by Jeffrey C. King. [REVIEW] Mind 119 (475):814-819.
David Liebesman (2010). Jeffrey C. King, The Nature and Structure of Content. [REVIEW] Philosophical Review 119 (2):246-250.
Added to index2009-04-11
Total downloads56 ( #76,482 of 1,907,232 )
Recent downloads (6 months)19 ( #34,384 of 1,907,232 )
How can I increase my downloads?