|Abstract||The paper is a detailed reconstruction of Bernard Bolzano’s account of merely possible objects. According to Bolzano, there are some objects which are merely possible. They are neither denizens of space and time nor members of the causal order, but they could have been so. Examples are merely possible persons, mountains etc., objects which are neither actual nor persons or mountains, but which could have been both. Bolzano’s views are contrasted with the theory of Alexius Meinong, and it is shown that they have a modern counterpart in the accounts of merely possible objects that were developed by Bernard Linsky & Ed Zalta, and by Timothy Williamson|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Robert Brisart (2012). True Objects and Fulfilments Under Assumption in the Young Husserl. Axiomathes 22 (1):75-89.
Andrej Krause (2006). Are Bolzano's Substances Simple? American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 80 (4):543-562.
Ned Markosian (2000). What Are Physical Objects? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 61 (2):375-395.
Bernard Bolzano (1973). Theory of Science. Boston,D. Reidel Pub. Co..
Johan Benthem (1985). The Variety of Consequence, According to Bolzano. Studia Logica 44 (4):389 - 403.
Paul Rusnock & Mark Burke (2011). Etchemendy and Bolzano on Logical Consequence. History and Philosophy of Logic 31 (1):3-29.
Jocelyn Benoist (forthcoming). La Réécriture Par Bolzano de l' Esthétique Transcendantale. Revue de Métaphysique Et de Morale.
Paul Rusnock (2011). Kant and Bolzano on Logical Form. Kant-Studien 102 (4):477-491.
Benjamin Schnieder (2007). Mere Possibilities: A Bolzanian Approach to Non-Actual Objects. Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (4):525-550.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads50 ( #21,076 of 548,984 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,320 of 548,984 )
How can I increase my downloads?