Search results for 'Intensionality' (try it on Scholar)

670 found
Sort by:
  1. James W. Cornman (1962). Intentionality and Intensionality. Philosophical Quarterly 12 (January):44-52.score: 24.0
    Certain philosophers have held the thesis of the unity of science. As often conceived, the thesis has two parts: the thesis of physicalism and the thesis of extensionality. For each of these two parts there is an outstanding problem, i.e. the problem of intentionality and the problem of intensionality respectively. The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to make explicit the nature of these two problems, and second, to show to what extent they can be said to be (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Ezra Keshet (2010). Split Intensionality: A New Scope Theory of de Re and de Dicto. [REVIEW] Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (4):251-283.score: 24.0
    The traditional scope theory of intensionality (STI) (see Russell 1905; Montague 1973; Ladusaw 1977; Ogihara 1992, 1996; Stowell 1993) is simple, elegant, and, for the most part, empirically adequate. However, a few quite troubling counterexamples to this theory have lead researchers to propose alternatives, such as positing null situation pronouns (Percus 2000) or actuality operators (Kamp 1971; Cresswell 1990) in the syntax of natural language. These innovative theories do correct the undergeneration of the original scope theory, but at a (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Chris Fox & Shalom Lappin (forthcoming). Type-Theoretic Logic with an Operational Account of Intensionality. Synthese:1-22.score: 24.0
    We formulate a Curry-typed logic with fine-grained intensionality within Turner’s typed predicate logic. This allows for an elegant presentation of a theory that corresponds to Fox and Lappin’s property theory with curry typing, but without the need for a federation of languages. We then consider how the fine-grained intensionality of this theory can be given an operational interpretation. This interpretation suggests itself as expressions in the theory can be viewed as terms in the untyped lambda-calculus, which provides a (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. David Parsons (2013). Inscriptionalism and Intensionality. Philosophia 41 (2):567-585.score: 24.0
    Intensional contexts are typically characterised by an apparent failure of either (A) the principle of the inter-substitution of co-referring terms salva veritate, or (B) existential generalisation. The difficulties which are seen to occur do so in contexts involving either modality or the propositional attitudes. In this paper attempts are made to determine whether or not Scheffler’s inscriptional analysis can provide a viable means of accounting for the problems which are thought to occur in intensional contexts. Somewhat unexpectedly, little effort has (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Mark Sainsbury (2012). Representing Unicorns: How to Think About Intensionality. In G. Currie, P. Kotatko & M. Pokorny (eds.), Mimesis: Metaphysics, Cognition, Pragmatics. College Publications.score: 22.0
    The paper focuses on two apparent paradoxes arising from our use of intensional verbs: first, their object can be something which does not exist, i.e. something which is nothing; second, the fact that entailment from a qualified to a non-qualified object is not guaranteed. In this paper, I suggest that the problems share a solution, insofar as they arise in connection with intensional verbs that ascribe mental states. The solution turns on (I) a properly intensional or nonrelational notion of representation (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Patrick Bondy (2013). Intensionality and Epistemic Justification. Philosophia 41 (2):463-475.score: 22.0
    The purpose of this paper is to raise a new objection to externalist process reliabilism about epistemic justification. The objection is that epistemic justification is intensional—it does not permit the substitution of co-referring expressions—and reliabilism cannot accommodate that.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Mohan P. Matthen (1989). Intensionality and Perception: A Reply to Rosenberg. Journal of Philosophy 86 (December):727-733.score: 21.0
  8. Harold Morick (1971). Intentionality, Intensionality, and the Psychological. Analysis 32 (December):39-44.score: 21.0
  9. David S. Oderberg (2002). Intelligibility and Intensionality. Acta Analytica 17 (1):171-178.score: 21.0
    A common argumentative strategy employed by anti-reductionists involves claiming that one kind of entity cannot be identified with or reduced to a second because what can intelligibly be predicated of one cannot be predicated intelligibly of the other. For instance, it might be argued that mind and brain are not identical because it makes sense to say that minds are rational but it does not make sense to say that brains are rational. The scope and power of this kind of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. William C. Kneale (1968). Intentionality and Intensionality, Part I. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 73:73-90.score: 21.0
  11. A. N. Prior (1968). Intentionality and Intensionality, Part II. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 91:91-106.score: 21.0
  12. Alexander Rosenberg (1989). Intentionality, Intensionality and Representation. Behaviorism 17 (2):137-140.score: 21.0
  13. Mary Dalrymple, John Lamping, Fernando Pereira & Vijay Saraswat (1997). Quantifiers, Anaphora, and Intensionality. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 6 (3):219-273.score: 20.0
    The relationship between Lexical-Functional Grammar (LFG) functional structures (f-structures) for sentences and their semanticinterpretations can be formalized in linear logic in a way thatcorrectly explains the observed interactions between quantifier scopeambiguity, bound anaphora and intensionality.Our linear-logic formalization of the compositional properties ofquantifying expressions in natural language obviates the need forspecial mechanisms, such as Cooper storage, in representing thescoping possibilities of quantifying expressions. Instead, thesemantic contribution of a quantifier is recorded as a linear-logicformula whose use in a proof will establish (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Stefano Predelli (2012). Indexicality, Intensionality, and Relativist Post-Semantics. Synthese 184 (2):121-136.score: 18.0
    This essay argues that relativist semantics provide fruitful frameworks for the study of the relationships between meaning and truth-conditions, and consequently for the analysis of the logical properties of expressions. After a discussion of the role of intensionality and indexicality within classic double-indexed semantics, I explain that the non-relativistic identification of the parameters needed for the definition of truth and for the interpretation of indexicals is grounded on considerations that are irrelevant for the assessment of the relationships between meaning (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Dustin Tucker & Richmond H. Thomason (2011). Paradoxes of Intensionality. Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (3):394-411.score: 18.0
    We identify a class of paradoxes that is neither set-theoretical nor semantical, but that seems to depend on intensionality. In particular, these paradoxes arise out of plausible properties of propositional attitudes and their objects. We try to explain why logicians have neglected these paradoxes, and to show that, like the Russell Paradox and the direct discourse Liar Paradox, these intensional paradoxes are recalcitrant and challenge logical analysis. Indeed, when we take these paradoxes seriously, we may need to rethink the (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Stephen F. Barker (1982). Intensionality and Intentionality. Philosophy Research Archives 8:95-109.score: 18.0
    This paper proposes interpretations of the vexed notions of intensionality and intentionality and then investigates their resulting interrelations.The notion of intentionality comes from Brentano, in connection with his view that it can help us understand the mental. Setting aside Husserl’s basic definition of intentionality as not quite in line with Brentano’s explanatory purpose, this paper proposes that intentionality be defined in terms of inexistence and indeterminacy.It results that Brentano’s thesis (that all and only mental phenomena are intentional) will not (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Prakash Mondal (2013). How the Intentionality of Emotion Can Be Traced to the Intensionality of Emotion: Intensionality in Emotive Predicates. Pragmatics and Cognition 21 (1):35-54.score: 18.0
    In this paper a connection between intentionality, intensionality, language and emotion will be drawn up through a demonstration of an intimate relationship between the intentionality of emotion and intensionality in language. What will be shown is that the intentionality of emotion can ultimately be traced to the intensionality of emotional contexts. For this purpose, emotive predicates will be categorized in terms of their intensional behavior and regularities. They will then be brought forward for an explication of why (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Graeme Forbes (2002). Intensionality: Graeme Forbes. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76 (1):75–99.score: 16.0
    [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 (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Dustin Tucker (2010). Intensionality and Paradoxes in Ramsey's 'the Foundations of Mathematics'. Review of Symbolic Logic 3 (1):1-25.score: 16.0
    In , Frank Ramsey separates paradoxes into two groups, now taken to be the logical and the semantical. But he also revises the logical system developed in Whitehead and Russellthe intensional paradoxess interest in these problems seriously, then the intensional paradoxes deserve more widespread attention than they have historically received.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. J. M. Saul (2002). Intensionality. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76:75 - 119.score: 16.0
    [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 (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Graeme Forbes (2006). Attitude Problems: An Essay On Linguistic Intensionality. Clarendon Press.score: 16.0
    Ascriptions of mental states to oneself and others give rise to many interesting logical and semantic problems. Attitude Problems presents an original account of mental state ascriptions that are made using intensional transitive verbs such as 'want', 'seek', 'imagine', and 'worship'. Forbes offers a theory of how such verbs work that draws on ideas from natural language semantics, philosophy of language, and aesthetics.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Guido Imaguire (2011). Logic and Intensionality. Principia 14 (1):111-24.score: 16.0
    There are different ways we use the expressions “extension” and “intension”. I specify in the first part of this paper two basic senses of this distinction, and try to show that the old metaphysical sense, by means of particular instance vs. universal, is more fundamental than the contemporary sense by means of substitutivity. In the second part, I argue that logic in general is essentially intensional, not only because logic is a rule-guided activity, but because even the extensional definition of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. B. -U. Yi (2014). Intensionality and Variable Objects. Analysis 74 (3):431-436.score: 16.0
    This article examines Moltmann’s analysis of intensional transitive verbs (e.g. need, search for ), and argues that the analysis fails because the key notion it employs, ‘variable satisfier’, is inconsistent.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. David D. Auerbach (1985). Intensionality and the Gödel Theorems. Philosophical Studies 48 (3):337--51.score: 15.0
  25. John-Michael Kuczynski (2010). Intensionality, Modality, Rationality: Some Presemantic Considerations. Journal of Pragmatics 42 (8):2314-2346.score: 15.0
    On the basis of arguments put forth by (Kripke, 1977a) and (Kripke, 1980), it is widely held that one can sometimes rationally accept propositions of the form "P and not-P" and also that there are necessary a posteriori truths. We will find that Kripke's arguments for these views appear probative only so long as one fails to distinguish between semantics and presemantics—between the literal meanings of sentences, on the one hand, and the information on the basis of which one identifies (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Gennaro Chierchia (1994). Intensionality and Context Change. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 3 (2):141-168.score: 15.0
    It is arguably desirable to have a theory of meaning that (i) does not identify propositions with sets of worlds, (ii) enables to capture the dynamic character of semantic interpretation and (iii) provides the basis for a semantic program that incorporates and extends the achievements of Montague semantics. A theory of properties and propositions that meets these desiderata is developed and several applications to the semantic analysis of natural languages are explored.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Graeme Forbes (1987). Indexicals and Intensionality: A Fregean Perspective. Philosophical Review 96 (1):3-31.score: 15.0
  28. Michael Jubien (1972). The Intensionality of Ontological Commitment. Noûs 6 (4):378-387.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Neil Campbell (2010). Explanatory Exclusion and the Intensionality of Explanation. Theoria 76 (3):207-220.score: 15.0
    Ausonio Marras has argued that Jaegwon Kim's principle of explanatory exclusion depends on an implausibly strong interpretation of explanatory realism that should be rejected because it leads to an extensional criterion of individuation for explanations. I examine the role explanatory realism plays in Kim's justification for the exclusion principle and explore two ways in which Kim can respond to Marras's criticism. The first involves separating criteria for explanatory truth from questions of explanatory adequacy, while the second appeals to Kim's fine-grained (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Richard Sylvan (2003). The Importance of Nonexistent Objects and of Intensionality in Mathematics. Philosophia Mathematica 11 (1):20-52.score: 15.0
    In this article, extracted from his book Exploring Meinong's Jungle and Beyond, Sylvan argues that, contrary to widespread opinion, mathematics is not an extensional discipline and cannot be extensionalized without considerable damage. He argues that some of the insights of Meinong's theory of objects, and its modern development, item theory, should be applied to mathematics and that mathematical objects and structures should be treated as mind-independent, non-existent objects.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Nicholas Griffin (2003). Foreword to the Importance of Nonexistent Objects and of Intensionality in Mathematics. Philosophia Mathematica 11 (1):16-19.score: 15.0
  32. Jennifer M. Saul (2002). Intensionality: What Are Intensional Transitives?: Jennifer Saul. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76 (1):101–119.score: 15.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Hector-Neri Castañeda (1979). Intensionality and Identity in Human Action and Philosophical Method. Noûs 13 (2):235-260.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Solomon Feferman (1985). Intensionality in Mathematics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 14 (1):41 - 55.score: 15.0
  35. Terry Horgan (2000). The Two-Envelope Paradox, Nonstandard Expected Utility, and the Intensionality of Probability. Noûs 34 (4):578–603.score: 15.0
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Dale Jacquette (2000). Identity, Intensionality, and Moore's Paradox. Synthese 123 (2):279 - 292.score: 15.0
  37. William Kneale & A. N. Prior (1968). Symposium: Intentionality and Intensionality. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 42:73 - 106.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Dale Jacquette (1997). Conceivability, Intensionality, and the Logic of Anselm's Modal Argument for the Existence of God. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 42 (3):163-173.score: 15.0
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Genoveva Marti (1993). The Source of Intensionality. Philosophical Perspectives 7:197-206.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Rosemarie Rheinwald (1994). Causation and Intensionality: A Problem for Naturalism. European Journal of Philosophy 2 (1):41-64.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. John J. Drummond (1998). From Intentionality to Intensionality and Back. Études Phénoménologiques 14 (27-28):89-126.score: 15.0
  42. Nicholas D. Smith (1976). Republic 476e–480a: Intensionality in Plato's Epistemology? Philosophical Studies 30 (6):427 - 429.score: 15.0
  43. Olli Koistinen (1996). Causality, Intensionality and Identity: Mind Body Interaction in Spinoza. Ratio 9 (1):23-38.score: 15.0
  44. George Sher (1969). Reasons and Intensionality. Journal of Philosophy 66 (6):164-168.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. J. O. Urmson & Jonathan Cohen (1968). Symposium: Criteria of Intensionality. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 42:107 - 142.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Grzegorz Malinowski (2004). Inferential Intensionality. Studia Logica 76 (1):3 - 16.score: 15.0
    The paper is a study of properties of quasi-consequence operation which is a key notion of the so-called inferential approach in the theory of sentential calculi established in [5]. The principal motivation behind the quasi-consequence, q-consequence for short, stems from the mathematical practice which treats some auxiliary assumptions as mere hypotheses rather than axioms and their further occurrence in place of conclusions may be justified or not. The main semantic feature of the q-consequence reflecting the idea is that its rules (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Glyn Morrill (1990). Intensionality and Boundedness. Linguistics and Philosophy 13 (6):699 - 726.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. David Pearce (1988). Intensionality and the Nature of a Musical Work. British Journal of Aesthetics 28 (2):105-118.score: 15.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. James E. Tomberlin (1984). Identity, Intensionality, and Intentionality. Synthese 61 (1):111 - 131.score: 15.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Richard Zuber (2006). Possible Intensionality of the Verb Phrase Position. Analysis 66 (291):255–256.score: 15.0
1 — 50 / 670