Body, Mind, and Method pp 241-294 | Cite as
Fictional Objects: How they are and how they aren’t
- 124 Downloads
Abstract
At Kenyon College, when I was an undergraduate (from 1957 to 1961), my friends and I argued hard about philosophical texts and issues, and we each spent many hours trying to think through the proper interpretation of these texts. A great deal of the stimulus for our discussions came from the seminars and other classes that Virgil Aldrich was running, as well as from his own present and past ideas on beauty as feeling, pictorial meaning and picture thinking, categorial ways of perceiving, and aesthetic experience. In presenting these ideas — and in his development of their descendants today — Aldrich has often appeared to me almost as a Socratic figure, compelling one’s attention with, as it is said in the Symposium, ‘nothing but a few simple words’. Like Socrates, he has refused to allow sophisticated theories to overrun basic truths, and yet he has not hesitated to suggest views of resonance and breadth.
Keywords
Actual World Actual Object Impossible World Open Sentence Fictional WorldPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
- Crittenden, C.: 1973, ‘Thinking about Non-Being’,Inquiry, vol. 16, pp. 290–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hintikka, J.: 1969, Models for Modalities, D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht, Holland.Google Scholar
- Howell, R.: 1974, ‘The Logical Structure of Pictorial Representation’, Theoria, vol. 40, pp. 76–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Howell, R.: 1976a, ‘Ordinary Pictures, Mental Representations, and Logical Forms’, Synthesesol. 33, pp. 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Howell, R.: 1976b, Review of John Woods: The Logic of Fiction, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, vol. 34, pp. 354–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kaplan, D.: 1969, ‘Quantifying In’, in Davidson, D. and Hintikka, J., eds., Words and Objections: Essays on the Work of W. V. Quine, D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht, Holland, pp. 178–214.Google Scholar
- Kripke, S.: 1972, ‘Naming and Necessity’, in Davidson, D. and Harm an, G., eds., Semantics of Natural Language, D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht, Holland, pp. 253–355 and 763–769.Google Scholar
- Marcus, R. B.: 1976, ‘Dispensing with Possibilia’, Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, vol. 49, pp. 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Moore, G. E.: 1959, Philosophical Papers, Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
- Parsons, T.: 1974, ‘A Prolegomenon to Meinongian Semantics’, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 71, pp. 561–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Parsons, T.: 1975, ‘A Meinongian Analysis of Fictional Objects’, Grazer Philosophische Studien, vol. 1, pp. 73–86.Google Scholar
- Plantinga, A.: 1974, The Nature of Necessity, Oxford University Press, London.Google Scholar
- Thomason, R. H.: 1973, ‘Perception and Individuation’, in Munitz, M., ed., Logic and Ontology, New York University Press, New York, pp. 261–285.Google Scholar
- Tolstoy, L.: no date, Anna Karenina, Grosset and Dunlap, New York.Google Scholar
- Walton, K. L.: 1973, ‘Pictures and Make-Believe’, Philosophical Review, vol. 82, pp. 283–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Walton, K. L.: forthcoming a, ‘How Remote are Fictional Worlds from the Real World?’ [now in The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, vol. 37, 1978, pp. 11–23].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Walton, K. L.: forthcoming b, ‘On Fearing Fictions’, to appear in the Journal of Philosophy [now in vol. 75,1978, pp. 5–27].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wolterstorff, N.: 1976, ‘Worlds of Works of Art’, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, vol. 35, pp. 121–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Woods, J.: 1974, The Logic of Fiction, Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
- Woods, J.: forthcoming, ‘Meinongean Theories of Fictional Objects’, to appear in the Journal of Literary Semantics.Google Scholar