Abstract

I present here my criticism of Chateaubriand’s account of propositions as having an identifying character with respect to reality. I claim that propositions are better understood as pictures of possible states-of-affairs, and that this account is more natural considering the acts of judgment that are at the origin of propositions. I also present a possible way of understanding the notion of a possible state-of-affairs that takes care of the seemingly absurd case of necessarily false, but meaningful propositions.