Logique & Analyse 55 (220):513-554 (2012)

This paper is the twin of (Duží and Jespersen, in submission), which provides a logical rule for transparent quantification into hyperprop- ositional contexts de dicto, as in: Mary believes that the Evening Star is a planet; therefore, there is a concept c such that Mary be- lieves that what c conceptualizes is a planet. Here we provide two logical rules for transparent quantification into hyperpropositional contexts de re. (As a by-product, we also offer rules for possible- world propositional contexts.) One rule validates this inference: Mary believes of the Evening Star that it is a planet; therefore, there is an x such that Mary believes of x that it is a planet. The other rule validates this inference: the Evening Star is such that it is believed by Mary to be a planet; therefore, there is an x such that x is believed by Mary to be a planet. Issues unique to the de re variant include partiality and existential presupposition, sub- stitutivity of co-referential (as opposed to co-denoting or synony- mous) terms, anaphora, and active vs. passive voice. The validity of quantifying-in presupposes an extensional logic of hyperinten- sions preserving transparency and compositionality in hyperinten- sional contexts. This requires raising the bar for what qualifies as co-denotation or equivalence in extensional contexts. Our logic is Tichý’s Transparent Intensional Logic. The syntax of TIL is the typed lambda calculus; its highly expressive semantics is based on a procedural redefinition of, inter alia, functional abstraction and application. The two non-standard features we need are a hyper- intension (called Trivialization) that presents other hyperintensions and a four-place substitution function (called Sub) defined over hy- perintensions.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
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

What is Meaning?Scott Soames - 2010 - Princeton University Press.
Quantifiers and Propositional Attitudes.Willard van Orman Quine - 1956 - Journal of Philosophy 53 (5):177-187.
Quantifying In.David Kaplan - 1968 - Synthese 19 (1-2):178-214.
Dthat.David Kaplan - 1978 - In Peter Cole (ed.), Syntax and Semantics. Academic Press. pp. 221--243.

View all 20 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Can Concepts Be Defined in Terms of Sets?Marie Duží & Pavel Materna - 2010 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 19 (3):195-242.
Coreference.Reinhard Muskens - 1993 - In R. E. Asher & J. M. Y. Simpson (eds.), The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Oxford: Pergamon. pp. 769.
Semantics for Opaque Contexts.Kirk Ludwig & Greg Ray - 1998 - Philosophical Perspectives 12:141-66.
Reply to Livet: Meta-Abeyance?Thomas Metzinger - 2006 - PSYCHE: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Research On Consciousness 12.
Indiscernibility of Identicals.Pavel Tichý - 1986 - Studia Logica 45 (3):251 - 273.
Formal Languages and Intensional Semantics.Sten Carl Lindstrom - 1981 - Dissertation, Stanford University
A Notorious Affair Called Exportation.Howard Burdick - 1991 - Synthese 87 (3):363 - 377.
Quine on Opacity in Modal and Doxastic Contexts.Mark William Dickson - 1995 - Dissertation, The University of British Columbia (Canada)
Salmon Trapping.Takashi Yagisawa - 1997 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 57 (2):351-370.


Added to PP index

Total views
85 ( #123,287 of 2,439,572 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #136,727 of 2,439,572 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes