Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Content, Cognition, and CommunicationPhilosophical Papers II$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Nathan Salmon

Print publication date: 2007

Print ISBN-13: 9780199284726

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2007

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199284726.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 03 August 2020

Is De Re Belief Reducible to De Dicto? (1998) *

Is De Re Belief Reducible to De Dicto? (1998) *

(p.270) 15 Is De Re Belief Reducible to De Dicto? (1998)*
Content, Cognition, and Communication

Nathan Salmon (Contributor Webpage)

Oxford University Press

The title question is disambiguated. One reading is given an affirmative response, the other a negative. Quine's argument against reducibility is criticized, Kaplan's contrary argument that reducibility is required is also criticized, and Burge's response to Kaplan on Quine's behalf is also criticized. A modest form of reducibility is defended. Kaplan's argument is modified to show that modest reducibility of de re belief to de dicto shows more about the latter than the former.

Keywords:   Burge, Kaplan, Quine, reduction

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .