Advertisement

Philosophical Studies

, Volume 172, Issue 6, pp 1549–1573 | Cite as

Pretense and fiction-directed thought

  • Michael R. Hicks
Article
  • 316 Downloads

Abstract

Thought about fictional characters is special, and needs to be distinguished from ordinary world-directed thought. On my interpretation, Kendall Walton and Gareth Evans have tried to show how this serious fiction-directed thought can arise from engagement with a kind of pretending. Many criticisms of their account have focused on the methodological presupposition, that fiction-directed thought is the appropriate explanandum. In the first part of this paper, I defend the methodological claim, and thus the existence of the problem to which pretense is supposed to be a solution. In the second part, I elaborate and defend the pretense theory as a solution to this problem.

Keywords

Fiction Pretense Kendall Walton Gareth Evans 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper has been gestating for many years, over which time I have discussed the material with too many people to list. Thanks especially to Maura Tumulty for giving me the initial motivation to write it, to Dan Guevara for reading a late draft, and to an anonymous reviewer for this journal for incisive criticisms.

References

  1. Currie, G. (1990). The Nature of Fiction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Deutsch, H. (2000). In A. Everett, & T. Hofweber (Eds.), Making Up Stories’ (pp. 149–181).Google Scholar
  3. Deutsch, H. (2013). Friend on making up stories. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 113, 365–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Eagle, A. (2007). Telling tales. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 107, 125–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Evans, G. (1982). In J. McDowell (Ed.), The varieties of reference. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  6. Everett, A., & Hofweber, T. (Eds.). (2000). Empty names, fiction and the puzzles of non-existence. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  7. Friedman, O., & Leslie, A. M. (2007). The conceptual underpinnings of pretense: Pretending is not ‘behaving-as-if’. Cognition, 105, 103–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Friend, S. (2000). In A. Everett and & T. Hofweber (Eds.), Real people in unreal contexts (pp. 183–203).Google Scholar
  9. Grice, P. (1989). Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and Intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hicks, M. (2010). A note on pretense and co-reference. Philosophical Studies, 149, 395–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kripke, S. (2011). Vacuous names and fictional entities, In Philosophical troubles: Collected papers (Vol. 1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Lewis, D. (1978). Truth in fiction. American Philosophical Quarterly, 15, 37–46.Google Scholar
  14. Martinich, A. P., & Stroll, A. (2007). Much Ado about nonexistence: Fiction and reference. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  15. McDowell, J. (1982). Criteria, defeasibility and knowledge. In Meaning, Knowledge and Reality (pp. 369–394). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  16. Morreall, J. (1993). Fear without belief. The Journal of Philosophy, 90, 359–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pautz, A. B. (2008). Fictional coreference as a problem for the pretense theory. Philosophical Studies, 141, 147–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rakoczy, H., & Tomasello, M. (2006). Two-year-olds grasp the intentional structure of pretense acts. Developmental Science, 9, 557–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Richard, M. (2000). In A. Everett & T. Hofweber (Eds.), Semantic pretense (pp. 205–232).Google Scholar
  20. Russell, B. (1919). Introduction to mathematical philosophy. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.Google Scholar
  21. Sainsbury, R. M. (2010). Fiction and fictionalism. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Searle, J. (1975). The logical status of fictional discourse. New Literary History, 6, 319–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Thomasson, A. L. (1999). Fiction and metaphysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Walton, K. L. (1973). Pictures and make-believe. The Philosophical Review, 82, 283–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Walton, K. L. (1978). Fearing fictions. The Journal of Philosophy, 75, 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Walton, K. L. (1990). Mimesis as make-believe: On the foundations of the representational arts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Williams, B. (2002). Truth & truthfulness: An essay in genealogy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell, tr. by G.E.M. Anscombe.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Miami UniversityOxfordOhio

Personalised recommendations