Towards a semantics for the artifactual theory of fiction and beyond

In her book Fiction and Metaphysics (1999) Amie Thomasson, influenced by the work of Roman Ingarden, develops a phenomenological approach to fictional entities in order to explain how non-fictional entities can be referred to intrafictionally and transfictionally, for example in the context of literary interpretation. As our starting point we take Thomasson’s realist theory of literary fictional objects, according to which such objects actually exist, albeit as abstract and artifactual entities. Thomasson’s approach relies heavily on the notion of ontological dependence, but its precise semantics has not yet been developed. Moreover, the modal approach to the notion of ontological dependence underlying the Artifactual Theory has recently been contested by several scholars. The main aims of this paper are (i) to develop a semantic approach to the notion of ontological dependence in the context of the Artifactual Theory of fiction, and in so doing bridge a number of philosophical and logical gaps; (ii) to generalize Thomasson’s categorial theory of ontological dependence by reconstructing ontological categories of entities purely in terms of different structures of ontological dependence, rather than in terms of the basic kinds of entities the categorical entities depend on.

[1]  Keith Sanger The Language of Fiction , 1995, The Work of Fire.

[2]  Gaye Shortland,et al.  Turtles all the way down , 1997 .

[3]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  Fiction, Creation and Fictionality : An Overview , 2014 .

[4]  Noël Carroll,et al.  Mimesis as Make-Beleive@@@Mimesis as Make-Believe: On the Foundations of the Representational Arts. , 1995 .

[5]  Carl J. Posy Free logics , 2007, The Many Valued and Nonmonotonic Turn in Logic.

[6]  Edward N. Zalta,et al.  Intensional Logic and the Metaphysics of Intentionality , 1988 .

[7]  Graham Priest Creating Non-Existents , 2010 .

[8]  John W. Schaffer On What Grounds What , 2009 .

[9]  Saul A. Kripke,et al.  Naming and Necessity , 1980 .

[10]  E. Lowe The possibility of metaphysics , 1998 .

[11]  R. Cameron Turtles all the Way Down: Regress, Priority and Fundamentality , 2007 .

[12]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Handbook of Philosophical Logic , 2002 .

[13]  M. Giergielewicz,et al.  "Das Literarische Kunstwerk : Eine Untersuchung aus dem Grenzgebiet der Ontologie, Logik und Literaturwissenschaft", Roman Ingarden, Halle 1931 : [recenzja] / Mieczysław Giergielewicz. , 1931 .

[14]  Graham Priest,et al.  Towards non-being : the logic and metaphysics of intentionality , 2005 .

[15]  Kit Fine,et al.  The Question of Realism , 2001 .

[16]  Edward N. Zalta,et al.  Abstract Objects: An Introduction to Axiomatic Metaphysics , 1983 .

[17]  Amie L. Thomasson Speaking of Fictional Characters , 2003 .

[18]  Francesco Berto Modal Meinongianism for Fictional Objects , 2008 .

[19]  C. S. Jenkins,et al.  Is Metaphysical Dependence Irreflexive , 2011 .

[20]  Amie L. Thomasson Fiction and metaphysics , 1998 .

[21]  Aarne Ranta Type-Theoretical Grammar , 1995 .

[22]  David Lewis Truth in Fiction , 1983 .

[23]  Gideon Rosen,et al.  Metaphysical Dependence: Grounding and Reduction , 2009 .

[24]  P. Simons Parts: A Study in Ontology , 1991 .

[25]  Benjamin Schnieder,et al.  Existential Dependence and Cognate Notions – By Fabrice Correia , 2007 .

[26]  Stephen Read,et al.  Thinking about logic , 1994 .

[27]  A. Voltolini How Ficta Follow Fiction: A Syncretistic Account of Fictional Entities , 2006 .

[28]  Jean-Marie Schaeffer,et al.  Pourquoi la fiction , 1999 .

[29]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  Individuality in Fiction and the Creative Role of the Reader , 2012, Revue internationale de philosophie.

[30]  Francesco Berto Modal Meinongianism and fiction: the best of three worlds , 2011 .

[31]  R. Stamper Ontological Dependency , 2007 .

[32]  Karl Aschenbrenner,et al.  Das literarische Kunstwerk , 1961 .