Abstract
It is widely accepted among philosophers that there is a tension between acquaintance constraints on singular thought and the plausible assumption that the truths of singular attitude reports ensure the subject's having singular thoughts. From this, anti-acquaintance theorists contend that acquaintance constraints must be rejected. As a response, many acquaintance theorists maintain that there is good reason to doubt a strong connection between singular attitude reports and singular thoughts. In this paper, however, I defend the acquaintance theory by arguing that there is in fact no tension at all. I consider three objections regarding singular attitude reports against the acquaintance theory: (i) ultra-liberal singular attitude reports, (ii) the “There is something that S believes to be F” locution, and (iii) infelicities of singular attitude reports. Then, I argue that none of them succeed in showing a genuine tension.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 126-142 |
| Number of pages | 17 |
| Journal | Analytic Philosophy |
| Volume | 64 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jun 2023 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Singular thoughts, singular attitude reports, and acquaintance'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver