John Rogers Searle (; born 31 July 1932) is an American philosopher. He is currently Willis S. and Marion Slusser Professor Emeritus of the Philosophy of Mind and Language and Professor of the Graduate School at the University of California, Berkeley. Widely noted for his contributions to the philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, and social philosophy, he began teaching at UC Berkeley in 1959.
Searle defines intentionality as the power of minds to be about, to represent (see Correspondence theory of truth), or to stand for, things, properties and states of affairs in the world. The nature of intentionality is an important part of discussions of Searle's "Philosophy of Mind". Searle emphasizes that the word 'intentionality, (the part of the mind directed to/from/about objects and relations in the world independent of mind) should not be confused with the word 'intensionality' (the logical property of some sentences that do not pass the test of 'extensionality'). In Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind (1983), Searle applies certain elements of his account(s) of "illocutionary acts" to the investigation of intentionality. Searle also introduces a technical term the Background, which, according to him, has been the source of much philosophical discussion ("though I have been arguing for this thesis for almost twenty years," Searle writes, "many people whose opinions I respect still disagree with me about it"). He calls Background the set of abilities, capacities, tendencies, and dispositions that humans have and that are not themselves intentional states. Thus, when someone asks us to "cut the cake" we know to use a knife and when someone asks us to "cut the grass" we know to use a lawnmower (and not vice versa), even though the actual request did not include this detail. Searle sometimes supplements his reference to the Background with the concept of the Network, one's network of other beliefs, desires, and other intentional states necessary for any particular intentional state to make sense. Searle argues that the concept of a Background is similar to the concepts provided by several other thinkers, including Wittgenstein's private language argument ("the work of the later Wittgenstein is in large part about the Background") and Pierre Bourdieu's habitus. To give an example, two chess players might be engaged in a bitter struggle at the board, but they share all sorts of Background presuppositions: that they will take turns to move, that no one else will intervene, that they are both playing to the same rules, that the fire alarm won't go off, that the board won't suddenly disintegrate, that their opponent won't magically turn into a grapefruit, and so on indefinitely. As most of these possibilities won't have occurred to either player, Searle thinks the Background must be unconscious, though elements of it can be called to consciousness (if the fire alarm does go off, say). In his debate with Derrida, Searle argued against Derrida's view that a statement can be disjoined from the original intentionality of its author, for example when no longer connected to the original author, while still being able to produce meaning. Searle maintained that even if one was to see a written statement with no knowledge of authorship it would still be impossible to escape the question of intentionality, because "a meaningful sentence is just a standing possibility of the (intentional) speech act". For Searle ascribing intentionality to a statement was a basic requirement for attributing it any meaning at all.

Q: What is intentionality?
A: Searle defines intentionality as the power of minds to be about, to represent (see Correspondence theory of truth), or to stand for, things, properties

Q: Are there any other interesting aspects about this article?
A: The nature of intentionality is an important part of discussions of Searle's "Philosophy of Mind

Q: What does the background mean?
A: He calls Background the set of abilities, capacities, tendencies, and dispositions that humans have and that are not themselves intentional states.

Q: What is the NETWORK?
A: one's network of other beliefs, desires, and other intentional states necessary for any particular intentional state to make sense.
What else did he believe?
Searle argues that the concept of a Background is similar to the concepts provided by several other thinkers, Searle maintained that even if one was to see a written statement with no knowledge of authorship it would still be impossible to escape the question of intentionality, In his debate with Derrida, Searle argued against Derrida's view that a statement can be disjoined from the original intentionality of its author, Searle thinks the Background must be unconscious, though elements of it can be called to consciousness (if the fire alarm does go off, say). Searle argues that the concept of a Background is similar to the concepts provided by several other thinkers,
Searle argues that the concept of a Background is similar to the concepts provided by several other thinkers,