COGNITIVE SIGNIFICANCE AND EPISTEMIC INTENSIONS

In this paper I discuss an important aspect of David Chalmers' interpretation of two-dimensional semantics. I will argue that his approach cannot be used to model something like Fregean sense: Semantic concepts similar to the notion of a sense do not, unlike the notion of an epistemic intension, depend on epistemological notions like apriority or acceptability on purely rational grounds. This conceptual difference gives rise to the problem that primary intensions cannot do the work Fregean senses were designed for: They cannot, contrary to what Chalmers suggests, explain cognitive role.