Cargando…

Mistake is to Myth What Pretense is to Fiction: A Reply to Goodman

In this reply I defend Kripke’s creationist thesis for mythical objects (Reference and Existence, 2013) against Jeffrey Goodman’s counter-argument to the thesis (“Creatures of fiction, objects of myth”, Analysis, 74(1), 35–40, 2014). I argue that Goodman has mistaken the basis for when mythical abst...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Lundgren, Björn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6086246/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30147176
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11406-017-9812-5
_version_ 1783346480660086784
author Lundgren, Björn
author_facet Lundgren, Björn
author_sort Lundgren, Björn
collection PubMed
description In this reply I defend Kripke’s creationist thesis for mythical objects (Reference and Existence, 2013) against Jeffrey Goodman’s counter-argument to the thesis (“Creatures of fiction, objects of myth”, Analysis, 74(1), 35–40, 2014). I argue that Goodman has mistaken the basis for when mythical abstracta are created. Contrary to Goodman I show that, as well as how, Kripke’s theory consistently retains the analogy between creation of mythical objects and creation of fictional objects, while also explaining in what way they differ.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6086246
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60862462018-08-23 Mistake is to Myth What Pretense is to Fiction: A Reply to Goodman Lundgren, Björn Philosophia (Ramat Gan) Article In this reply I defend Kripke’s creationist thesis for mythical objects (Reference and Existence, 2013) against Jeffrey Goodman’s counter-argument to the thesis (“Creatures of fiction, objects of myth”, Analysis, 74(1), 35–40, 2014). I argue that Goodman has mistaken the basis for when mythical abstracta are created. Contrary to Goodman I show that, as well as how, Kripke’s theory consistently retains the analogy between creation of mythical objects and creation of fictional objects, while also explaining in what way they differ. Springer Netherlands 2017-03-08 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC6086246/ /pubmed/30147176 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11406-017-9812-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Article
Lundgren, Björn
Mistake is to Myth What Pretense is to Fiction: A Reply to Goodman
title Mistake is to Myth What Pretense is to Fiction: A Reply to Goodman
title_full Mistake is to Myth What Pretense is to Fiction: A Reply to Goodman
title_fullStr Mistake is to Myth What Pretense is to Fiction: A Reply to Goodman
title_full_unstemmed Mistake is to Myth What Pretense is to Fiction: A Reply to Goodman
title_short Mistake is to Myth What Pretense is to Fiction: A Reply to Goodman
title_sort mistake is to myth what pretense is to fiction: a reply to goodman
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6086246/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30147176
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11406-017-9812-5
work_keys_str_mv AT lundgrenbjorn mistakeistomythwhatpretenseistofictionareplytogoodman