Mind 112 (448):635-651 (2003)
|Abstract||It seems that every singular proposition implies that the object it is singular with respect to exists. It also seems that some propositions are true with respect to possible worlds in which they do not exist. The puzzle is that it can be argued that there is contradiction between these two principles. In this paper, I explain the puzzle and consider some of the ways one might attempt to resolve it. The puzzle is important because it has implications concerning the way we think about the relationship between a proposition and the claim that the proposition is true.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Ian Proops (2011). Russell on Substitutivity and the Abandonment of Propositions. Philosophical Review 120 (2):151-205.
Hagit Benbaji (2008). Two-Dimensionalism and the “Knowing Which” Requirement. Acta Analytica 23 (1):55-67.
Robert J. Howell (2005). A Puzzle for Pragmatism. American Philosophical Quarterly 42 (2):131-136.
Mark Balaguer (1998). Attitudes Without Propositions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 58 (4):805-26.
Joshua Armstrong & Jason Stanley (forthcoming). Singular Thoughts and Singular Propositions. Philosophical Studies.
Paloma Pérez-Ilzarbe (1996). The Doctrine of Descent in Jerónimo Pardo: Meaning, Inference, Truth. In I. Angelelli & M. Cerezo (eds.), Studies on the History of Logic. Walter de Gruyter.
Christopher Menzel (1993). Singular Propositions and Modal Logic. Philosophical Topics 21 (2):113-148.
Kai-Yee Wong (1996). Singular Propositions and the A Priori. Journal of Philosophical Research 21:107-116.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads57 ( #17,351 of 549,113 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,113 )
How can I increase my downloads?