Are the future and the past really opacity-creating operators?

Abstract

Among logicians there exists the widely accepted view that classical logic as developed by Frege, Russell, Peano, Peirce and others is not able to master all the problems arising in connection with indirect speech and similar phenomena. There is a myth that classical or so-called extensional logic is good only for one part of our language, for extensional contexts, while a large area of our language, consisting of intensional or opaque contexts, needs a special, non-extensional or intensional logic. It is obvious that this point of view denies the universality of logic and logical rules.