[Inquiry] Re: Imputed Quality -- Commentary

[Jon Awbrey]

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

IQ.  Commentary Note 3

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

Cf: IQ.      http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-April/thread.html#2505
Cf: IQ-COM.  http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-April/thread.html#2513
Cf: IQ-DIS.  http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-April/thread.html#2518

Let us reflect on the fact that "imputed qualities" involve the issues that
have frequently been discussed under the headings of "intentional contexts",
"intentional objects", "propositional attitudes", "referential opacity", and
a host of other headings.  In particular, I have in mind the works of Russell,
Quine, Barwise and Perry, and the whole "Situations and Attitudes" literature
that have tried various ways of addressing these problems.

By way of concrete forms to work on, let us contemplate these:

X imputes the quality Y to the object Z.
X imputes the predicate Y to the subject Z.

X imputes the penning of 'Hans Brinker' to Hans Christian Andersen.
X imputes the penning of 'Silver Skates' to Hans Christian Andersen.
X imputes the penning of 'Hans Brinker' to Mary Elizabeth Mapes Dodge.
X imputes the penning of 'Silver Skates' to Mary Elizabeth Mapes Dodge.

J imputes the authorship of "White Lily" to John Taine.
K imputes the authorship of "White Lily" to Eric Temple Bell.
L imputes the authorship of 'The Crystal Horde' to John Taine.
M imputes the authorship of 'The Crystal Horde' to Eric Temple Bell.

For starters, I think it's important to recognize that the use of the
verb "imputes" is something that we do to describe a 3-adic relation
among an imputer (or the mark, proxy, or representation thereof),
a predicate or its expression, and a subject or its expression.

Jon Awbrey

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o