| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 哲學研究所 === 97 === According to Colin Radford, being moved by the fate of fictional characters that are not believed to exist is problematic. This claim has been in dispute for more than thirty yeas. In this thesis I will defend Radford’s claim. I will start with Radford’s argument, and then introduce four kinds of opposite views, finally argue that Radford was right.
In the introduction, I use an example to show how Radford thinks. In Chapter 1, I interpret Radford’s thought in three stages. The first is, finding the question and trying to answer: how can we be moved by the fate of fictional characters? The second, developing his intuition: being moved by the fate of fiction characters is puzzling. The third, describing the response of being moved by the fate of fiction characters as “irrational”. Finally, I emphasize that the second stage is the core of Radford’s claim, and that intuition is the key to understand Radford’s thought. In Chapter 2, I introduce four kind of opposite views. First, we are not moved by the fate of “fiction characters”. Second, we are not “moved” by the fate of fictional characters. Third, we “believe” that fictional characters “do exist”. And forth, being moved by the fate of fictional characters that are not believed to exist is “not problematic”. Meanwhile I introduce Radford’s replies. In Chapter 3, I indicate that the four opposite views misunderstood Radford’s motivation, and can be seen as error theories and causal theories, which are not only false to our experience but also irrelevant to Radford’s claim. Finally I argue that intuition is the key to decide if Radford is right. And our intuition is at Radford’s side. Even the opponents have the same intuition. So Radford’s claim is right, at least to those who have the same intuition with Radford. Being moved by the fate of fictional characters that are not believed to exist is problematic.
|
|---|
