On What There Isn't
Priest (Graham)
Source: Priest - Towards Non-Being, 2005, Chapter 5
Paper - Abstract

Paper StatisticsColour-ConventionsDisclaimer

Philosophers Index Abstract

    The major problem for a Meinongian theory of objects is to account for the properties that nonexistent objects have. In particular, objects cannot have all the properties that they are characterized as having, on pain of triviality. This paper suggests a solution to this problem. Nonexistent objects do have all those properties they are characterized as having, but not at this world: at the worlds that realize the way things are according to the representation of the cognitive agent who thinks about, or in other ways cognizes, the object. A formal model of this account is given, and some of its consequences explored.
Author’s Abstract
    Chapter 5 provides a discussion of Quine and Russell on non-existent objects. Their arguments aim to show that Meinong’s notion of such objects is incoherent. Quine’s well known argument about the fat man in the doorway is discussed and rejected.
  1. Introduction: Quine's Critique;
  2. Russell's Meinongianism;
  3. Russell's Critique of Meinong;
  4. On What There Is;
  5. The Possible Fat Man in the Doorway;
  6. Conclusion


Photocopy of complete Book filed in "Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 14 (P)".

Text Colour Conventions (see disclaimer)

  1. Blue: Text by me; © Theo Todman, 2020
  2. Mauve: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); © the author(s)

© Theo Todman, June 2007 - May 2020. Please address any comments on this page to theo@theotodman.com. File output:
Website Maintenance Dashboard
Return to Top of this Page Return to Theo Todman's Philosophy Page Return to Theo Todman's Home Page