Our topic is the theory of topics (that is, the theory of subject matter). My goal is to clarify and evaluate three competing traditions: what I call the way-based approach, the atom-based approach, and the subject-predicate approach. I develop (defeasible) criteria for adequacy using robust linguistic intuitions that feature prominently in the literature. Then I evaluate the extent to which various existing theories satisfy these constraints. I conclude that recent theories due to Parry, Perry, Lewis, and Yablo do not meet the constraints in total. I then introduce the issue-based theory—a novel and natural entry in the atom-based tradition that meets our constraints. In a coda, I categorize a recent theory from Fine as atom-based, and contrast it to the issue-based theory, concluding that they are evenly matched, relative to our main criteria of adequacy. I offer tentative reasons to nevertheless favour the issue-based theory.
|Number of pages||27|
|Journal||Australasian Journal of Philosophy|
|Early online date||2 Nov 2017|
|Publication status||Published - 2 Oct 2018|
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
This research is published within the project ‘The Logic of Conceivability’, funded by the European Research Council (ERC CoG), Grant Number 681404.
© 2017, © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Copyright 2018 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
- subject matter