Full Idea
Sooner or later the physicists will complete the catalogue of ultimate and irreducible things, with the likes of spin, charm and charge. But aboutness won't be on the list; intentionality simply doesn't go that deep.
Gist of Idea
Intentionality doesn't go deep enough to appear on the physicists' ultimate list of things
Source
Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], 4 Intro)
Book Reference
Fodor,Jerry A.: 'Psychosemantics' [MIT 1993], p.97
A Reaction
I totally agree with this, which I take to be a warning to John Searle against including something called 'intrinsic intentionality' into his ontology. Intentionality 'emerges' out of certain complex brain activity.