| Abstract: | According to act theories, propositions are structured cognitive act-types. Act theories appear to make propositions inherently representational and truth-evaluable, and to provide solutions to familiar problems with alternative theories, including Frege’s and Russell’s problems, and the third-realm and unity problems. Act theories have critical problems of their own, though: acts as opposed to their objects are not truth evaluable, not structured in the right way, not expressed by sentences, and not the objects of propositional attitudes. I show how identifying propositions with other cognitive event-types, namely thoughts, has the perceived virtues of act theories without the defects. |
