Philosophical analysis challenges the unique fictional world hypothesis, suggesting attitudes toward indeterminate claims do not favor it over standard accounts.
Blumberg and Holguín (2025) argue that our judgments about the kinds of attitudes that are appropriate to take toward indeterminate fictional claims support the view that, for any fiction, there is a single world that determines what is true according to that fiction. We argue that Blumberg and Holguin fail to show that our judgments about the kinds of attitudes that are appropriate to take toward indeterminate fictional claims support their view over the competing ‘standard view’.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oppy et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: