dc.contributor.author
García-Carpintero, Manuel
dc.date.issued
2024-03-04T18:45:40Z
dc.date.issued
2024-03-04T18:45:40Z
dc.date.issued
2024-03-04T18:45:40Z
dc.identifier
https://hdl.handle.net/2445/208370
dc.description.abstract
Several philosophers advance substantive theories of propositions, to deal with several issues they raise in connection with a concern with a long pedigree in philosophy, the problem of the unity of propositions. The qualification ‘substantive’ is meant to contrast with ‘minimal’ or ‘deflationary’ – roughly, views that reject that propositions have a hidden nature, worth investigating. Substantive views appear to create spurious problems by characterizing propositions in ways that make them unfit to perform their theoretical jobs. I will present in this light some critical points against Hanks’ (2015, 2019) act-theoretic view, and Recanati’s (2019) recent elaboration of Hanks’ notion of cancellation. Both Hanks and Recanati, I’ll argue, rely on problematic conceptions of fiction and pretense.
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.publisher
Oslo University Press
dc.relation
Versió postprint del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2021.1990795
dc.relation
Inquiry-An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, 2021
dc.relation
https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2021.1990795
dc.rights
(c) Oslo University Press, 2021
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.source
Articles publicats en revistes (Filosofia)
dc.subject
Representació (Filosofia)
dc.subject
Proposició (Lògica)
dc.subject
Representation (Philosophy)
dc.subject
Proposition (Logic)
dc.title
Pretense, cancellation, and the act theory of propositions
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion