Abstract
In this article I will begin by discussing recent criticism, by Mauro Antonelli and Werner Sauer, of the ontological interpretation of Franz Brentano’s concept of intentionality, as formulated by i.a. Roderick Chisholm. I will then outline some apparent inconsistencies of the positions advocated by Anto- nelli and Sauer with Brentano’s formulations of his theory in several works and lectures. This new evaluation of (unpublished) sources will then lead to a sketch of a new approach to Brentano’s theory of intentionality. Specifically, it will be argued that the notion of “intentional object” is inherently and un- avoidably ambiguous in every act of external perception, due to the fact that we can only have improper intentions directed at the external world.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 55–80 |
Journal | Brentano Studien |
Volume | XIII |
Publication status | Published - 2015 |
Keywords
- Franz Brentano
- Intentionality
- Intentional Objects
- Improper Presentations
- Symbolic Presentations