纯粹意向性情态虚构主义

IF 0.9 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Hicham Jakha
{"title":"纯粹意向性情态虚构主义","authors":"Hicham Jakha","doi":"10.1111/ejop.13049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article brings two outstanding figures into conversation about the problem of fictional entities and their indeterminacies: Roman Ingarden and David Lewis. Lewis's account of fiction lacks an adequate ontology of ficta-<i>qua</i>-objects. Relying on his modal realism does not help, for it would make ficta “concrete” entities that merely <i>indexically</i> differ from our world's entities. In this regard, I refer to Ingarden's “purely intentional entities.” I read Lewis's possible worlds in terms of Ingarden's ontology; hence establishing what I term “Purely Intentional Modal Fictionalism.” In so doing, the demarcation between fiction and actuality is preserved. In return, Lewis's “Analyses” adequately account for Ingarden's “spots of indeterminacy.” Therefore, my proposal reconciles Ingarden's ficta with Lewis's possibilist approach to truth in fiction. This approach grounds Lewis's account in a less problematic ontology with a distinct <i>sui generis</i> status for ficta and provides Ingarden's ficta with better determination principles.</p>","PeriodicalId":46958,"journal":{"name":"EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY","volume":"33 3","pages":"1100-1116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Purely Intentional Modal Fictionalism\",\"authors\":\"Hicham Jakha\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ejop.13049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article brings two outstanding figures into conversation about the problem of fictional entities and their indeterminacies: Roman Ingarden and David Lewis. Lewis's account of fiction lacks an adequate ontology of ficta-<i>qua</i>-objects. Relying on his modal realism does not help, for it would make ficta “concrete” entities that merely <i>indexically</i> differ from our world's entities. In this regard, I refer to Ingarden's “purely intentional entities.” I read Lewis's possible worlds in terms of Ingarden's ontology; hence establishing what I term “Purely Intentional Modal Fictionalism.” In so doing, the demarcation between fiction and actuality is preserved. In return, Lewis's “Analyses” adequately account for Ingarden's “spots of indeterminacy.” Therefore, my proposal reconciles Ingarden's ficta with Lewis's possibilist approach to truth in fiction. This approach grounds Lewis's account in a less problematic ontology with a distinct <i>sui generis</i> status for ficta and provides Ingarden's ficta with better determination principles.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46958,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY\",\"volume\":\"33 3\",\"pages\":\"1100-1116\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejop.13049\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejop.13049","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

本文介绍了两位杰出人物,他们是罗曼·英加登和大卫·刘易斯,讨论了虚构实体及其不确定性的问题。刘易斯对小说的描述缺乏一个充分的虚构物本体论。依赖于他的模态现实主义并没有帮助,因为它会使虚幻的“具体”实体仅仅在指数上与我们世界的实体不同。在这方面,我指的是inggarden的“纯粹有意实体”。我根据英加登的本体论来阅读刘易斯的可能世界;因此建立了我所说的“纯粹意向性情态虚构主义”这样一来,小说和现实之间的界限就得以保留。作为回报,刘易斯的《分析》充分解释了因加登的“不确定之处”。因此,我的建议将英加登的小说与刘易斯的可能性主义小说中的真理方法调和起来。这种方法将Lewis的描述建立在一个问题较少的本体上,为ficta提供了独特的自成一体的地位,并为Ingarden的ficta提供了更好的决定原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Purely Intentional Modal Fictionalism

This article brings two outstanding figures into conversation about the problem of fictional entities and their indeterminacies: Roman Ingarden and David Lewis. Lewis's account of fiction lacks an adequate ontology of ficta-qua-objects. Relying on his modal realism does not help, for it would make ficta “concrete” entities that merely indexically differ from our world's entities. In this regard, I refer to Ingarden's “purely intentional entities.” I read Lewis's possible worlds in terms of Ingarden's ontology; hence establishing what I term “Purely Intentional Modal Fictionalism.” In so doing, the demarcation between fiction and actuality is preserved. In return, Lewis's “Analyses” adequately account for Ingarden's “spots of indeterminacy.” Therefore, my proposal reconciles Ingarden's ficta with Lewis's possibilist approach to truth in fiction. This approach grounds Lewis's account in a less problematic ontology with a distinct sui generis status for ficta and provides Ingarden's ficta with better determination principles.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: ''Founded by Mark Sacks in 1993, the European Journal of Philosophy has come to occupy a distinctive and highly valued place amongst the philosophical journals. The aim of EJP has been to bring together the best work from those working within the "analytic" and "continental" traditions, and to encourage connections between them, without diluting their respective priorities and concerns. This has enabled EJP to publish a wide range of material of the highest standard from philosophers across the world, reflecting the best thinking from a variety of philosophical perspectives, in a way that is accessible to all of them.''
×
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