Fiction, Prepositional Attitudes, and Some Truths about Falsehood
Version of Record online: 23 JUN 2005
Volume 57, Issue 2, pages 177–190, June 2003
How to Cite
Orenstein, A. (2003), Fiction, Prepositional Attitudes, and Some Truths about Falsehood. Dialectica, 57: 177–190. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-8361.2003.tb00264.x
- Issue online: 23 JUN 2005
- Version of Record online: 23 JUN 2005
This paper presents an anti-realist account of fictional objects. Arguing for the involvement of non-veridical prepositional attitude ascriptions in the understanding of fiction, I maintain that there is no need to invoke Meinongian objects, possibilia or abstract objects for this purpose. In addition I argue against object dependent views (if there is no object, e.g., Sherlock Holmes, then there is no proposition expressed by “Sherlock Holmes lived in London”). I make a case for empty names playing a more significant role than that accorded on direct reference accounts of names. I close by noting points of similarity and of difference with Amie Thomasson and with Kendall Walton.