ABSTRACT
This chapter discusses that Participation Claim (PC) can capture genuine features that distinguish supposition from certain types of imagination (e.g., sensory and cognitive imagination). It describes White’s points on the normative differences between supposition and imagination. These can be seen as manifestations of the different kinds of engagement involved by these mental activities. White suggests why supposition and imagination are governed by such different normative features. PC-R distinguishes supposition from other types of imagination, but does not give enough arguments against the idea that supposition is the re-creation of a non-imaginative kind of mental state. The normative features which regulate differently sensory imagination and cognitive imagination, on the one hand, and supposition, on the other, might be explained by claiming that these traits are inherited from their counterparts, thus suggesting that the counterpart of supposition differs from both counterparts of these types of imagination.
