Abstract

The neat distinction between objects and concepts which prevails in standard extensional logic seems to be challenged by inexistent objects. Yet modal logics and Meinongian logics offer two very different non-extensional ways of dealing with such objects. While the former somehow stick to the object-concept distinction, the latter overcome it in such a way that objects come to get most of the main features which standardly characterise concepts. Now, just like non-fictional discourse requires distinguishing between a de re and a de dicto reading of some linguistic expressions, fiction requires distinguishing between a de altero mundo and a de dicto reading of expressions. And this pleads for the preservation of the object-concept distinction even for fiction. This is why modal logics provide a better tool for a general theory of reference that accounts both for fictional and non-fictional discourse even if Meinongian logics give a good account of the logic of intension.