|That clause: partial sentence, expresses e.g. a belief (propositional attitude). This content is intensional, i.e. it is not objective. For some authors, the partial sentence "that it is raining" is the name of the sentence "It is raining".|
Books on Amazon
That-clause/relational theory/Schiffer: is a singular term. - E.g. that snow is white has a reference that can be female/male - ((s) the incorrect sentence, ..) -Paratactic Analysis/Davidson: "that" (without ß) demonstrative, refers to my incident - SchifferVs: leads to the relation theory - (object of belief) - since there is an infinite number of relational predicates (> that-clause), they cannot appear as basic terms - Tradition:> compositionality.
That-clause/Schiffer: no singular term but indirect and partial characterization of what Elmar believes.
De Dicto/Schiffer: reduction to de dicto is only possible if a way of givenness without reference to objects of which they are about, is possible - ((s)> substitutional quantification?).
That-clause/belief/most authors/Schiffer: the that-clause does not refer to belief - that means to the neuronal Z-token which is the belief - but to entities with truth value and other content-determining characteristics - Problem: then we need (unlike propositions) an independent presentation of the contents of the neural Z-Tokens.
That-clause/Schiffer: Thesis: does not refer. Is no refering expression - problem: how should one explain: E.g. Paul and Elmar believe that ... so there is an attribute that they have in common - for nominalism, which denies any classes of properties, the language must not have compositional semantics.
Remnants of Meaning Cambridge 1987