imaginary referents, subjective goals

[MonDie]

This is mostly intended as fun.

 

I've been thinking that sometimes, depending on the action, the referent can be an idea. Unfortunately, this becomes complicated when actions are defined by subjective goals.

What is the widely held viewpoint on sense & reference for mental predicates such as "believe in...", "love...", "am intrigued by..."?

 

 

Suppose there is a red house (sense 1), and it might be a haunted house (sense 2).

 

I kicked the red house.

 

Kicking is a physical act, so it's the actual house. If it's haunted, then I kicked the haunted house.

 

I believe in the red house.

 

I think this referent is an idea. Whether this implies belief in the haunted house depends on what I believe the red house is. The principle of sense and reference operates on my idea instead. (Note: If you treat it as the actual thing, you can argue that I believe in all sorts of things.)

 

Sometimes verbs denote physical actions, but sometimes they denote an intention behind the physical actions.

 

I'm looking for the flashlight.

 

Looking for the flashlight can involve turning my head, opening closets, tearing wallpaper, etc. The defining feature is my goal, which is in my mind, yet the verb denotes a physical act. This complicates the nature of the referent. I could try to disambiguate my goal:

 

I'm looking for something I can believe is the flashlight.

I'm looking for the flashlight, whatever it may be.

Doesn't the latter version entail the former anyway? I will only believe that I'm working toward my subjective goal if I believe that what I'm to find will be the actual flashlight.

 

This only adds more layers of complexity.

I'm looking for her flashlight.

Edited November 11, 2014 by MonDie

[Strange]

Not sure I quite get your point but ...

 

Doesn't the latter version entail the former anyway?

 

Although, the latter implies that you might settle for something that isn't a flashlight if you can be persuaded (or persuade yourself) that it is, or is as good as, a flashlight.

 

Replace flashlight with love, and perhaps this explains why some people settle for something which is a substitute for love (friendship, control, being controlled, money ...)

[MonDie]

Even if his goal is to find the actual flashlight, whatever it may be, he's only really looking for it if he believes he's looking for it (whatever he believes it to be), because the action/pedicate is defined by his subjective intent rather than any physical occurrence.

 

 

 

Replace flashlight with love, and perhaps this explains why some people settle for something which is a substitute for love (friendship, control, being controlled, money ...)

 

If a word lacks a clearly distinct referent (or any referent at all), it's easy to see how the definition could become muddled by people who think it's something it isn't. We can easily test whether grapes have seeds. It's harder to test whether love hurts because "love" isn't a clearly distinct phenomenon.

Edited November 11, 2014 by MonDie