TY - JOUR
T1 - The hypothetical intentionalist's dilemma
T2 - A reply to Levinson
AU - Stecker, Robert
AU - Davies, Stephen
PY - 2010/7
Y1 - 2010/7
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78049420185&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/aesthj/ayq022
DO - 10.1093/aesthj/ayq022
M3 - Comment/debate
AN - SCOPUS:78049420185
SN - 0007-0904
VL - 50
SP - 307
EP - 312
JO - The British Journal of Aesthetics
JF - The British Journal of Aesthetics
IS - 3
ER -