From the Meinongian Point of View
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2022.028Keywords
Alexius Meinong, Peter van Inwagen, Willard van Orman Quine, non-existent objects, quantifiersAbstract
In this paper, I discuss one of Peter van Inwagen’s charges against the Meinongian thesis, which states that some objects do not exist. The charges aimed to show that the thesis either leads to a contradiction or that it is obscure. Both consequences support the opposite Quinean thesis, which states that every object exists. As opposed to the former, the latter ought to be consistent and clear. I argue why there is no contradiction in the Meinongian thesis and why the Quinean thesis is not clear.
References
Berto, F., 2013, Existence as a Real Property, Dordrecht: Springer. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4207-9
Castañeda, H.-N., 1974, “Thinking and the structure of the world”, Philosophia, 4 (1): 3–40. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02381514
Jacquette, D., 1996, Meinongian Logic. The Semantic of Existence and Nonexistence, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110879742
Lewis, D., 1990, “Noneism or allism”, Mind, 99: 23–31. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mind/XCIX.393.24
Parsons, T., 1980, Nonexistent Objects, New Heaven and London: Yale University Press. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2185016
Paśniczek, J., 1999, The Logic of Intentional Objects. A Meinongian Version of Classical Logic, Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Press. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8996-3
Priest, G., 2005, Towards Non-being. The Logic and Metaphysics of Intentionality, Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0199262543.001.0001
Priest, G., 2016, Towards Non-being. The Logic and Metaphysics of Intentionality, 2nd Edition, Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198783596.001.0001
Quine, W. v. O., 1948, “On what there is”, Review of Metaphysics, 2(5): 21–38.
Rapaport, W., 1978, “Meinongian theories and a Russelian paradox”, Noûs, 12 (2): 153–180. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2214690
Routley, R., 1980, Exploring Meinong’s Jungle and Beyond: An Investigation of Noneism and the Theory of Items, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University.
Sendłak, M., 2022, “On the methodological restrictions of the principle of characterization”, Erkenntnis, 87 (2): 807–825, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10670-020-00219-2
Sylvan, R., 1995, “Re-exploring item theory. Object-theory liberalized, pluralized and simplified but comprehensivized”, Grazer Philosophische Studien, 50: 47–86. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/gps1995504
van Inwagen, P., 1998, “Meta-ontology”, Erkenntnis, 48 (2–3): 233–250. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/a:1005323618026
van Inwagen, P., 2008, “McGinn on existence”, Philosophical Quarterly, 58 (230): 36–58. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9213.2008.534.x
Zalta, E. N., 1983, Abstract Objects: An Introduction to Axiomatic Metaphysics, Dordrecht: D. Reidel. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2274530
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Maciej Sendłak
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 1321
Number of citations: 0
