How to defend realism about impossible fiction without the principle of poetic license

IF 1.4 1区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Eugene Ho
{"title":"How to defend realism about impossible fiction without the principle of poetic license","authors":"Eugene Ho","doi":"10.1007/s11098-026-02519-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One strategy sometimes employed in defense of realism about impossible fiction is the endorsement of the principle of poetic license. While the principle of poetic license has become the focus of much discussion on impossible fiction, I argue that the principle of poetic license is neither necessary nor sufficient for realism about impossible fiction. The principle can be strengthened so as to entail realism about impossible fiction, but I argue that the strengthened principle is empirically inadequate given the data provided by fictionality puzzles. I then provide a different argument from existential generalization for realism about impossible fiction which does not rely on either variant of the principle of poetic license. I suggest that this position, which leaves open the possibility that certain sets of propositions could not be jointly true-in-fiction, accommodates the data provided by fictionality puzzles and is more theoretically attractive than an account that endorses either variant of the principle of poetic license. Following which, I defend realism about impossible fiction from error theories about impossible fiction.","PeriodicalId":48305,"journal":{"name":"PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES","volume":"329 1","pages":"1861-1880"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-026-02519-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One strategy sometimes employed in defense of realism about impossible fiction is the endorsement of the principle of poetic license. While the principle of poetic license has become the focus of much discussion on impossible fiction, I argue that the principle of poetic license is neither necessary nor sufficient for realism about impossible fiction. The principle can be strengthened so as to entail realism about impossible fiction, but I argue that the strengthened principle is empirically inadequate given the data provided by fictionality puzzles. I then provide a different argument from existential generalization for realism about impossible fiction which does not rely on either variant of the principle of poetic license. I suggest that this position, which leaves open the possibility that certain sets of propositions could not be jointly true-in-fiction, accommodates the data provided by fictionality puzzles and is more theoretically attractive than an account that endorses either variant of the principle of poetic license. Following which, I defend realism about impossible fiction from error theories about impossible fiction.
没有诗性许可原则的不可能小说如何为现实主义辩护
在为现实主义辩护时,对于不可能的小说,有时采用的一种策略是支持诗歌许可原则。虽然诗性许可原则已成为不可能小说研究的焦点,但我认为诗性许可原则对于不可能小说的现实主义来说既不是必要的也不是充分的。这一原则可以得到加强,从而将不可能的虚构纳入现实主义,但我认为,鉴于虚构谜题提供的数据,加强的原则在经验上是不充分的。然后我提出了一种不同于现实主义的关于不可能小说的存在概括的论证它不依赖于诗歌许可原则的任何一种变体。我认为,这种立场为某些命题在小说中不可能同时为真留下了可能性,它容纳了虚构性谜题提供的数据,并且在理论上比支持诗性许可原则的任何一种变体的解释更有吸引力。接下来,我将从关于不可能小说的错误理论中为不可能小说的现实主义辩护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES
PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Philosophical Studies was founded in 1950 by Herbert Feigl and Wilfrid Sellars to provide a periodical dedicated to work in analytic philosophy. The journal remains devoted to the publication of papers in exclusively analytic philosophy. Papers applying formal techniques to philosophical problems are welcome. The principal aim is to publish articles that are models of clarity and precision in dealing with significant philosophical issues. It is intended that readers of the journal will be kept abreast of the central issues and problems of contemporary analytic philosophy. Double-blind review procedure The journal follows a double-blind reviewing procedure. Authors are therefore requested to place their name and affiliation on a separate page. Self-identifying citations and references in the article text should either be avoided or left blank when manuscripts are first submitted. Authors are responsible for reinserting self-identifying citations and references when manuscripts are prepared for final submission.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书