It is advisable to treat some sorts of discourse about fiction with the aid of an intensional operator "in such-And-Such fiction...." the operator may appear either explicitly or tacitly. It may be analyzed in terms of similarity of worlds, As follows: "in the fiction f, A" means that a is true in those of the worlds where f is told as known fact rather than fiction that differ least from our world, Or from the belief worlds of the community in (...) which the fiction originated. (shrink)

Hintikka's second generation epistemic logic introduces a syntactic device allowing to express independence relations between certain logical constants. De re knowledge attributions can be reformulated in terms of quantifier independence, but the reformulation does not extend to non-factive attitudes like belief. There, formulae with independent quantifiers serve to express a new type of attitude, intermediate between de dicto and de re, called ‘de objecto’: in each possible world compatible with the agent's belief, there is an individual with the specified property (...) – in each world the same individual, which or who need not exist actually. The philosophical benefits of our analysis of propositional attitudes include a refined account of the behaviour of proper names as well as of indefinite and definite descriptions in attitude reports. Some remarks about perception and about the hallucination argument are also presented. (shrink)

L'aptitude a dire Je est une des remarques distinctives de la subjectivite: si un caillou se mettait a nous parler de lui-meme, nous pourrions difficilement, l'etonnement dissipe, ne pas le tenir pour une personne. Toutefois, pour beaucoup de philosophes, cette aptitude a dire je n'est que l'une des manifestations d'une aptitude plus profonde et plus generale de la conscience de soi. Une creature ne pourrait parler de soi que parce qu'elle serait consciente de soi et c'est cette aptitude a la (...) conscience de soi qui constiturait l'essence de la subjectivite. On se propose de renverser ici cet order de preseance et de montrer que la subjectivite est identique a l'aptitude a dire je. L'egologie n'est pas le signe ou la manifestation de la subjectivite, mais son essence meme et la conscience de soi n'est rien d'autre que la pensee egologique. Il en resulte qu'une conscience, dont le langage ne contriendrait nul marqueur de la premiere personne, ne serait pas un sujet. Mais un langage pourrait-il ne pas contenir de marquer de la premiere personne? Etait-il possible que nous ne fussion pas des sujets? Une exsitence impersonnelle est-elle possible? (shrink)

This paper deals with the semantics of de dicto , de re and de se belief reports. First, I flesh out in some detail the established, classical theories that assume syntactic distinctions between all three types of reports. I then propose a new, unified analysis, based on two ideas discarded by the classical theory. These are: (i) modeling the de re/de dicto distinction as a difference in scope, and (ii) analyzing de se as merely a special case of relational de (...) re attitudes. The resurrection of these ideas takes place in a dynamic setting. My formalization of the first idea involves a modification of the presupposition-as-anaphora resolution algorithm for DRT. The second involves treating acquaintance relations as second-order presuppositions, to be bound in the context by means of higher-order unification, or accommodated if necessary. The resulting framework requires no syntactic distinctions between different modes of attitude, with the exception of a specific subclass of de se reports characterized by special ‘ de se pronouns’ (i.e. PRO and logophors). These special pronouns are handled in syntax; everything alse is passed on to the pragmatic resolution module as it appears on the surface. The more sophisticated contextual resolution process nonetheless ensures adequate output truth conditions for a variety of classical and novel puzzles. In particular, I compare the new pragmasemantic system to the classical, syntactic analysis with respect to iterated and quantified reports, and monstrously shifted indexicals. (shrink)

Suppose now that two philosophers, McX and I, differ over ontology. Suppose McX maintains there is something which I maintain there is not. McX can, quite consistently with his own point of view, describe our difference of opinion by saying that I refuse to recognize certain entities. I should protest of course that he is wrong in his formulation of our disagreement, for I maintain that there are no entities, of the kind which he alleges, for me to recognize; but (...) my finding him wrong in his formulation of our disagreement is unimportant, for I am committed to considering him wrong in his ontology anyway. When I try to formulate our difference of opinion, on the other hand, I seem to be in a predicament. I cannot admit that there are some things which McX countenances and I do not, for in admitting that there are such things I should be contradicting my own rejection of them. (shrink)

The main goal of this paper is to present and compare two approaches to formalizing cross-world comparisons like John might have been taller than he is in quantified modal logics. One is the standard method employing degrees and graded positives, according to which the example just given is to be paraphrased as something like The height that John has is such that he might have had a height greater than it, which is amenable to familiar formalization strategies with respect to (...) quantified modal logic. The other approach, based on subjunctive modal logic, mimics the mixed indicative-subjunctive patterns typical of cross-world comparisons in many natural languages by means of explicit mood markers. This latter approach is new and should, for various reasons, appeal to linguists and philosophers. Along the way, I argue that attempts to capture cross-world comparison by means of sentential operators are either inadequate or subject to substantive logical and philosophical objections. (shrink)

Les pronoms personnels peuvent faire référence à la représentation physique (comme une statue ou une photographie) d’une personne plutôt qu’à cette personne elle-même. L’article présente une explication de ce liage sans identité apparente. Une objection est adressée à la théorie des proxies de Reuland et Winter, fondée sur la distinction entre attitudes de re et attitudes de se. La stratégie proposée ici consiste à introduire une nouvelle modalité pour chaque nouveau support d’une représentation physique, ce qui permet d’éviter les proxies (...) et de restaurer l’identité à la base de la résolution des anaphores. Les modalités correspondent à des fenêtres modales au travers desquelles le sujet peut appréhender des objets, existants ou non, y compris lui-même. La sémantique proposée suppose de réinterpréter certains prédicats. Elle emprunte à Wehmeier l’idée de relation inter-mondaine, qui soulève en tant que telle des questions métaphysiques. L’article aborde ces questions, pour proposer finalement d’étendre la théorie des fenêtres modales à l’ensemble des relations intentionnelles. (shrink)