Can We Dispense with Non-Existent Intentionalia?

In this paper, first of all, I want to show that Sainsbury’s new irrealist argument against Meinongianism regarding non-existent intentional objects (intentionalia) does not go through. Yet moreover, this dismissal of Sainsbury’s argument does not show that one must endorse an ultrarealist Meinongian perspective on such objects. For there is an intermediate way between irrealism and ultrarealism about non-existent intentionalia that stems out of Crane’s phenomenological conception of intentionalia as schematic objects, having as such no metaphysical nature. This is a conception that Sainsbury himself actually embraces.