Acta Analytica

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 1–9 | Cite as

Gendler on the Puzzle(s) of Imaginative Resistance

Article

Abstract

Gendler reformulated the so-called imaginability (or imaginative) puzzle in terms of authorial breakdown. The main idea behind this move was to isolate the essential features displayed by the alleged problematic cases and to specify a puzzle general enough to be applied to a variety of different types of imaginative resistance. I offer various criticisms of Gendler’s approach to imaginative resistance that also raises some more general points on the recent literature on the topic.

Keywords

Imaginative resistance Truth in fiction Artistic categories Art and ethics 

References

  1. Bonomi, A., & Zucchi, S. (2003). A pragmatic framework for truth in fiction. Dialectica, 57(2), 103–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brock, S. (2012). The puzzle of imaginative failure. The Philosophical Quarterly, 62(248), 443–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gendler, & Szabo, T. (2000). The puzzle of imaginative resistance. The Journal of Philosophy, 97(2), 55–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gendler, & Szabo, T. (2006). Imaginative resistance revisited. In S. Nichols (Ed.), The architecture of imagination (pp. 149–74). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lamarque, P. (1990/96). Logic and criticism. In P. Lamarque (Ed.), Fictional points of view (pp. 55–70). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Lewis, D. (1973). Counterfactuals. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Lewis, D. (1978/1983). Truth in fiction. In D. Lewis (Ed.), Philosophical papers (Vol. 1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Liao, S. (2013). Moral persuasion and the diversity of fictions. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 94(3), 269–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Liao, S. & Gendler, Szabo, T. (Forthcoming). The Problem of Imaginative Resistance: An Overview. In J. Gibson & N. Carroll (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Literature. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Liao, S., Strohminger, N., & Sripada, C. S. (2014). Empirically investigating imaginative resistance. British Journal of Aesthetics, 54(3), 339–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Priest, G. (1997). Sylvan’s box: a short story and ten morals. Notre Dame J Form Log, 38, 573–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Proudfoot, D. (2006). Possible worlds semantics and fiction. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 35, 9–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sauchelli, A. (2013). The merited response argument and artistic categories. J Aesthet Art Crit, 71(3), 239–46.Google Scholar
  14. Stock, K. (2013). Imagining and fiction: some issues. Philos Compass, 8(10), 887–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Walton, K. (1994). Morals in fiction and fictional morality. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 68, 27–50.Google Scholar
  16. Walton, K. (1990). Mimesis as make-believe. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Walton, K. (2006). On the So-called puzzle of imaginative resistance. In S. Nichols (Ed.), The architecture of imagination (pp. 137–48). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Weatherson, B. (2004). Morality, fiction, and possibility. Philos Imprint, 4(3), 1–27.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyLingnan UniversityHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations