The hypothetical intentionalist's dilemma: A reply to Levinson

Robert Stecker, Stephen Davies

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

5 Scopus citations


In a recent essay, Jerrold Levinson defends his version of hypothetical intentionalism (HI), which is a theory of literary interpretation, from two criticisms. The first, argued by Stephen Davies, is that it is equivalent to the value-maximizing view. The second, argued by Robert Stecker, is that there are straightforward counterexamples to HI. We will argue that Levinson does not successfully fend off either criticism, and further, that in the process of attempting to do so, creates another dilemma for his view.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)307-312
Number of pages6
JournalThe British Journal of Aesthetics
Issue number3
StatePublished - Jul 2010

Cite this