David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76:75 - 119 (2002)
[Graeme Forbes] In I, I summarize the semantics for the relational/notional distinction for intensional transitives developed in Forbes (2000b). In II-V I pursue issues about logical consequence which were either unsatisfactorily dealt with in that paper or, more often, not raised at all. I argue that weakening inferences, such as 'Perseus seeks a mortal gorgon, therefore Perseus seeks a gorgon', are valid, but that disjunction inferences, such as 'Perseus seeks a mortal gorgon, therefore Perseus seeks a mortal gorgon or an immortal gorgon', are invalid. Since 'a gorgon' and 'a mortal gorgon or an immortal gorgon' are extensionally and intensionally the same quantifier, it is not completely trivial to arrange the semantics of intensional transitives so that this classification of the inferences is obtained. (This paper is an abridged version of Forbes (2001a); the latter will be incorporated into a forthcoming monograph, Attitude Problems.) /// [Jennifer Saul] This paper discusses the question of which verbs are intensional transitives. In particular, I ask which verbs Forbes should take to be intensional transitives. I argue that it is very difficult to arrive at a clear and plausible understanding of what an intensional transitive is-making it difficult to answer these questions. I end by briefly raising some questions about the usefulness of the category of intensional transitives
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(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
Imre Ruzsa (1981). An Approach to Intensional Logic. Studia Logica 40 (3):269 - 287.
Jennifer M. Saul (2002). Intensionality: What Are Intensional Transitives?: Jennifer Saul. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76 (1):101–119.
Mark Richard (2001). Seeking a Centaur, Adoring Adonis: Intensional Transitives and Empty Terms. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 25 (1):103–127.
Graeme Forbes (2010). Intensional Verbs in Event Semantics. Synthese 176 (2):227 - 242.
Reinhard Muskens (2007). Intensional Models for the Theory of Types. Journal of Symbolic Logic 72 (1):98-118.
E. H. Alves & J. A. D. Guerzoni (1990). Extending Montague's System: A Three Valued Intensional Logic. Studia Logica 49 (1):127 - 132.
Desheng Zong (2000). Studies of Intensional Contexts in Mohist Writings. Philosophy East and West 50 (2):208-228.
Graeme Forbes (2002). Intensionality: Graeme Forbes. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76 (1):75–99.
Added to index2010-07-27
Total downloads17 ( #101,887 of 1,100,136 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #190,012 of 1,100,136 )
How can I increase my downloads?