Content and Theme in Attitude Ascriptions

Abstract
This paper is about a substitution-failure in attitude ascriptions, but not the one you think. A standard view about the semantic shape of ‘that’-clause attitude ascriptions is that they are fundamentally relational. The attitude verb expresses a binary relation whose extension, if not empty, is a collection of pairs each of which consists in an individual and a proposition, while the ‘that’-clause is a term for a proposition. One interesting problem this view faces is that, within the scope of many attitude verbs, ‘that’-clauses are not interchange able with certain other terms which stand for the same propositions as the clauses are supposed to. For example, (1a) below may be true, but (1c) is probably not: (1) a. Holmes {fears/suspects} that Moriarty has returned. b. That Moriarty has returned is the proposition that Moriarty has re turned. c. Holmes {fears/suspects} the proposition that Moriarty has returned. For only the exceptionally timorous fear propositions, and, excluding contexts in which we speak of a ‘suspect premise’, only the unusually paranoid suspect them. The truth-conditional change eVected by substituting propositional descrip tion for ‘that’- clause illustrated in (1) occurs with a wide range of attitude verbs. If you understand that the window of opportunity is closing, perhaps you should act before it is too late, but if you mere-.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,781
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Knowledge-the and Propositional Attitude Ascriptions.Berit Brogaard - 2008 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 77 (1):147-190.
Russellianism and Prediction.David Braun - 2001 - Philosophical Studies 105 (1):59 - 105.
Propositional Attitudes.Reinhard Muskens - 1993 - In R. E. Asher & J. M. Y. Simpson (eds.), The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Pergamon Press.
Attitudes Without Propositions.Mark Balaguer - 1998 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 58 (4):805-26.
Is Belief a Propositional Attitude?Ray Buchanan - 2012 - Philosophers' Imprint 12.
De Se Attitudes: Ascription and Communication.Dilip Ninan - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (7):551-567.
On Believing That I Am Thinking.Tom Stoneham - 1998 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 98 (2):125-44.
Judgment Ascriptions.Kjell Johan Sæbø - 2009 - Linguistics and Philosophy 32 (4):327-352.
Added to PP index
2010-12-22

Total downloads
41 ( #130,903 of 2,198,971 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #299,438 of 2,198,971 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature