David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
A belief ascription such as “Oedipus believes that his mother is the queen of Thebes” can be understood in two ways, one in which it seems true, and another in which it seems false. It can seem true because the woman who was, in fact, Oedipus’ mother was believed by him to be the queen of Thebes. It can seem false because Oedipus himself would have sincerely denied that Jocasta could be correctly characterized as “Oedipus’s mother.” Belief ascriptions thus seem to admit of two interpretations, and this has suggested to many that belief predicates such as “________ believes that his mother is the queen of Thebes” are ambiguous between a de dicto and a de re reading.1 However, the impression of ambiguity is a function of the narrow ranges of examples that philosophers focus on. When we consider our ascriptional practices as a whole, the suggestion that belief predicates are ambiguous is neither plausible nor needed to explain the de dicto/de re distinction. The following will argue that understanding paradigmatic de dicto and de re ascriptions in terms of disavowals from a more basic sort of ascription is preferable to positing a simple ambiguity in which each of the two sorts of ascription are conceptually primitive.
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Joel Smith (2006). Which Immunity to Error? Philosophical Studies 130 (2):273-83.
Ari Maunu (2000). A Simple Solution to the Problem of De Se Belief Ascriptions. Communication and Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly Journal 33 (3-4):199-226.
Dale Jacquette (1989). Stich againstde dicto‐de reambiguity. Philosophical Psychology 2 (2):223-230.
Ari Maunu (2002). A Problem with De Re Belief Ascriptions, with a Consequence to Substitutivity. Philosophia 29 (1-4):411-421.
Ken Taylor (2002). De Re And De Dicto: Against The Conventional Wisdom. Noûs 36 (s16):225-265.
Bryan Frances (2002). A Test for Theories of Belief Ascription. Analysis 62 (2):116–125.
Richard Holton (1994). Attitude Ascriptions and Intermediate Scope. Mind 103 (410):123-130.
Andreas Kemmerling (2003). Belief Ascription: Objective Sentences and Soft Facts. Facta Philosophica 5 (2):203-222.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads25 ( #150,221 of 1,793,078 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #281,225 of 1,793,078 )
How can I increase my downloads?