DOCSLIB.ORG

Philosophical Intuitions – Philosophical Analysis A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Philosophical Intuitions – Philosophical Analysis A PHILOSOPHICAL INTUITIONS – PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri-Columbia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy By JAMES F. MCBAIN JR. Dr. Peter J. Markie, Dissertation Supervisor AUGUST 2008 © Copyright by James F. McBain Jr. All Rights Reserved The undersigned, appointed by the Dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled PHILOSOPHICAL INTUITIONS—PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS presented by James F. McBain Jr., A candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, And hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. ____________________________________ Professor Peter J. Markie ____________________________________ Professor Paul Weirich ____________________________________ Professor Donald Sievert _____________________________________ Professor Matthew McGrath _____________________________________ Professor Todd R. Schachtman This work is dedicated to Elizabeth I. McBain and in loving memory of James F. McBain Sr. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation has been a long time coming. I have received enormous encouragement and support from so many for so long. First, I would like to thank Dr. Peter J. Markie for his never ending support and belief in me. Dr. Markie not only has helped me through this project, but has shown me what it means to be a philosopher and a teacher. I can never adequately express my gratitude. None of this would have ever been possible if it were not for him. I would also like to thank the members of my committee – Dr. Paul Weirich, Dr. Donald Sievert, Dr. Matthew McGrath, and Dr. Todd Schactman. The feedback they gave me helped this work become what it has. Any improvements in this work are attributed to my committee, any errors are solely mine. This dissertation has also helped from the numerous conversations I have had over the years with Jared Bates, Jason Berntsen, Jesse Estevez, Darin Finke, Bruce Glymour, Amy Lara, Jordan Lindberg, Jon Mahoney, Alan Nichols, Doug Patterson, Jamie Phillips, Mark Price, Don Viney, Yeongseo Yeo, and numerous others from the University of Missouri TA corral. They have all helped me in so many ways and I am grateful to each one. Finally, I would like to thank my family for their love and support. In both my professional and personal life, they have been the center and the ones to give me a hand when I needed it. So to Mom, Dad, Janice, Jerry, Stephen, and Andrew, I love you and thank you. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS AKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………...ii ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………….v PREFACE – AN OVERVIEW OF AN AMBITIOUS GOAL……………………………1 CHAPTER 1. THE ROLE OF INTUITIONS IN PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS 1.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………..7 1.2 A Sample Philosophical Analysis: The Gettier Problem……………...…12 1.3 Robust Conceptual Analysis……………………………………………..17 1.4 Robust Conceptual Analysis-Modified…………………………………..24 1.5 Modest Conceptual Analysis…………………………………………….26 1.6 Explication……………………………………………………………….32 1.7 Reflective Equilibrium…………………………………...………………36 1.8 Concluding Remarks……………………………………………………..50 2. THE STRUCTURE OF PHILOSOPHICAL INTUITIONS 2.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………51 2.2 Intuitions as Psychological States………………………………………..53 2.2.1 Intuitions as Specific Psychological States………………54 2.3 Intuitions as Propositional Attitudes………………………………….….56 2.3.1 On Confusing Intuitions with Perceptions and Memories.56 2.3.2 Intuitions as Propositional Attitudes, but Not Beliefs…...58 2.4 Understanding the Content of an Intuition…………………………….....62 2.5 The “Spontaneous” Nature of Intuitions……………………………...….65 2.5.1 Are Intuitions Judgments?.................................................66 2.5.2 The Theory-ladenness of Intuitions…………………..….70 2.6 Degrees of Convictions……………………………………………….….76 2.7 The Fallibility of Intuitions…………………………………………..…..78 2.7.1 A Philosophical Argument for the Fallibility of Intuitions…………………………………………………78 2.7.2 Empirical Reasons for the Fallibility of Intuitions……....80 2.8 Do Intuitions Involve an Apparent Necessity?..........................................83 2.9 Concluding Remarks……………………………………………………..86 3. THE EPISTEMIC STATUS OF PHILOSOPHICAL INTUITIONS 3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………...………….88 3.2 A Sample of the Supposed Epistemic Status of Intuitions – The Gettier Case………………………………………………………………………91 3.3 Traditionalism about the Epistemic Status of Intuitions……………...….92 3.3.1 The Self-Defeat Argument………………………….……93 3.3.2 Worries about the Self-Defeat Argument………………..98 3.3.3 The Epistemic Autonomy „Argument‟…………………100 3.3.4 Worries about the Epistemic Autonomy‟ Argument‟….103 3.3.5 Summary of the Criticisms of Traditionalism………….105 3.4 Skepticism about the Epistemic Status of Intuitions……………………105 3.4.1 The Calibration Argument…………………………...…106 3.4.2 Worries about the Calibration Argument……………….107 3.4.3 The Unreliability of Intuitions………………………….110 3.4.4 The Legitimacy of the Unreliability Criticisms……...…114 3.4.5 Hales‟ “Problem of Intuition”………………………..…116 3.4.6 Worries about the “Problem of Intuition”……………....117 3.5 The Moderate Stance on the Epistemic Status of Intuitions……………120 3.5.1 Informed Intuitions……………………………………..121 3.5.2 Intuitional Degrees – The Hierarchical Status of Intuitions…………………………………………..……125 3.5.3 Responding to the Unreliability Worries…………….…131 3.6 Concluding Remarks………………………………………………..….132 4. PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS IN LIGHT OF THEORY-LADEN INTUITIONS 4.1 Introduction……………………………………………………….……133 4.2 Revisiting the Methods……………………………………………..…..134 4.2.1 The Task and Goals of Conceptual Analysis………..…134 4.2.2 The Task and Goal of Explication…………………..….134 4.2.3 The Task and Goal of Reflective Equilibrium……….…136 4.3 The Problem of Disagreement……………………………………...…..137 4.3.1 The Problem of Disagreement – Empirical Version…....138 4.3.2 The Problem of Disagreement – Philosophical Version……………………………………………….....143 4.3.3 Intuition-Based Philosophical Methods and Disagreement……………………………………...……146 4.4 The Charge from Psychology………………………………………..…150 4.4.1 Can Intuition-Based Philosophical Methods Avoid the Charge?............................................................................152 4.5 Evaluating Reflective Equilibrium…………………………………..…154 4.6 A Methodological Proposal – Practical Explication……………………156 4.7 Practical Explication and the Ambitions of Philosophy – A Few Brief Remarks…………………………………………………………...……160 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………163 VITA……………………………………………………………………………………169 PHILOSOPHICAL INTUITIONS – PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS James F. McBain Jr. Dr. Peter J. Markie, Dissertation Supervisor ABSTRACT This work is a defense of philosophical intuitions and the use of them in philosophy. First, I survey the main forms of intuition-based philosophical methods – conceptual analysis, explication, and reflective equilibrium – and demonstrate how each treats philosophical intuitions as basic evidential sources. Next, I will develop and argue for a conception of what a philosophical intuition is. Third, I will provide an argument for the evidential status of intuitions based on the correct account of the nature of a philosophical intuition. Finally, I will argue that if philosophy wishes to use intuitions in philosophical theorizing, then it must engage in practical explication. To this end, I will be developing an account of philosophical intuitions that correctly captures the nature of the intuitions used in philosophy and demonstrating how philosophers best can use those intuitions to justify their analyses of philosophical concepts. v Preface – An Overview of an Ambitious Goal This work is a defense of philosophical intuitions and the use of them in philosophy. There has been much in the way of addressing this topic particularly in the last 10 years. In that ever-growing literature, two main positions have formed. On the one side there are those, mostly rationalists, who hold vigilant to a conception of philosophical analysis which makes use of a priori intuitions and maintain that the only legitimate philosophy is so intuition-based. Their opponents are those, mostly naturalists, who maintain the use of intuitions in philosophy is what ultimately plagues philosophy. These naturalists maintain we ought to give up all use of intuition-based philosophical methods altogether. The ever-raging debate has largely followed these demarcated lines. What is surprising about this debate is that little has been said about the middle ground. And it is this largely ignored middle ground where I believe a solution to the debate lies. To that end, I will be developing an account of philosophical intuitions (a non-a priori account) which correctly captures the nature of the intuitions used in philosophy and demonstrating how philosophers best can use those intuitions to justify their analyses of philosophical concepts. This work is divided up into four chapters. In chapter one I survey the various philosophical methods used in philosophy and show how they all make use of intuitions. To that end, I will look at three main methods – conceptual analysis (of which I will break into the further more refined versions of robust conceptual analysis, modified robust conceptual analysis, and modest conceptual analysis), explication, and reflective equilibrium. Each of these methods makes use of intuitions although they make use of 1 different conceptions of intuitions as I will show. Furthermore, I will show not just that each of these philosophical methods
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Philosophical Theory-Construction and the Self-Image of Philosophy
    Open Journal of Philosophy, 2014, 4, 231-243 Published Online August 2014 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojpp http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojpp.2014.43031 Philosophical Theory-Construction and the Self-Image of Philosophy Niels Skovgaard Olsen Department of Philosophy, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany Email: [email protected] Received 25 May 2014; revised 28 June 2014; accepted 10 July 2014 Copyright © 2014 by author and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Abstract This article takes its point of departure in a criticism of the views on meta-philosophy of P.M.S. Hacker for being too dismissive of the possibility of philosophical theory-construction. But its real aim is to put forward an explanatory hypothesis for the lack of a body of established truths and universal research programs in philosophy along with the outline of a positive account of what philosophical theories are and of how to assess them. A corollary of the present account is that it allows us to account for the objective dimension of philosophical discourse without taking re- course to the problematic idea of there being worldly facts that function as truth-makers for phi- losophical claims. Keywords Meta-Philosophy, Hacker, Williamson, Philosophical Theories 1. Introduction The aim of this article is to use a critical discussion of the self-image of philosophy presented by P. M. S. Hacker as a platform for presenting an alternative, which offers an account of how to think about the purpose and cha- racter of philosophical theories.
    [Show full text]
  • Logical Fallacies Moorpark College Writing Center
    Logical Fallacies Moorpark College Writing Center Ad hominem (Argument to the person): Attacking the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. We would take her position on child abuse more seriously if she weren’t so rude to the press. Ad populum appeal (appeal to the public): Draws on whatever people value such as nationality, religion, family. A vote for Joe Smith is a vote for the flag. Alleged certainty: Presents something as certain that is open to debate. Everyone knows that… Obviously, It is obvious that… Clearly, It is common knowledge that… Certainly, Ambiguity and equivocation: Statements that can be interpreted in more than one way. Q: Is she doing a good job? A: She is performing as expected. Appeal to fear: Uses scare tactics instead of legitimate evidence. Anyone who stages a protest against the government must be a terrorist; therefore, we must outlaw protests. Appeal to ignorance: Tries to make an incorrect argument based on the claim never having been proven false. Because no one has proven that food X does not cause cancer, we can assume that it is safe. Appeal to pity: Attempts to arouse sympathy rather than persuade with substantial evidence. He embezzled a million dollars, but his wife had just died and his child needed surgery. Begging the question/Circular Logic: Proof simply offers another version of the question itself. Wrestling is dangerous because it is unsafe. Card stacking: Ignores evidence from the one side while mounting evidence in favor of the other side. Users of hearty glue say that it works great! (What is missing: How many users? Great compared to what?) I should be allowed to go to the party because I did my math homework, I have a ride there and back, and it’s at my friend Jim’s house.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    BAS C. VAN FRAASSEN Curriculum Vitae Last updated 3/6/2019 I. Personal and Academic History .................................................................................................................... 1 List of Degrees Earned ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 Title of Ph.D. Thesis ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 Positions held ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Invited lectures and lecture series ........................................................................................................................................ 1 List of Honors, Prizes ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Research Grants .................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Non-Academic Publications ................................................................................................................................................ 5 II. Professional Activities .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bias and Critical Thinking
    BIAS AND CRITICAL THINKING Point: there is an alternative to • being “biased” (one-sided, closed-minded, etc.) • simply having an “opinion” (by which I mean a viewpoint that has subjective value only: “everyone has their own opinions”) • being neutral and not taking a position In thinking about bias, it is important to distinguish between four things: 1. a particular position taken on an issue 2. the source of that position (its support and basis) 3. the resistance or openness to other positions 4. the impact that position has on other positions and viewpoints taken by the person Too often, people confuse these four. One result is that people sometimes assume that taking any position on an issue (#1) is an indication of bias. If this were true, then the only way to avoid bias would be to not take a position but rather simply present what are considered to be facts. In this way one is supposedly “objective” and “neutral.” However, it is highly debatable whether one can really be objective and neutral or whether one can present objective facts in a completely neutral way. More importantly, there are two troublesome implications of such a viewpoint on bias: • the ideal would seem to be not taking a position (but to really deal with issues we have to take a position) • all positions are biased and therefore it is difficult if not impossible to judge one position superior to another. It is far better to reject the idea that taking any position always implies bias. Rather, bias is a function either of the source of that position, or the resistance one has to other positions, or the impact that position has on other positions and viewpoints taken.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophical Analysis on the Nature and Forms of Information—From the Perspective of Marxist Philosophy †
    Proceedings Philosophical Analysis on the Nature and Forms of Information—From the Perspective of Marxist Philosophy † Mingfang Feng 1 and Liang Feng 2,* 1 School of Economics & Law, Shaanxi University of Technology, No.1, First Eastern Ring Road, Hanzhong 723001, China; [email protected] 2 School of Marxism Studies, Xi’an Jiaotong University, No.28 Xianning West Road, Xi’an 710049, China * Correspondence: [email protected] † Presented at the IS4SI 2017 Summit DIGITALISATION FOR A SUSTAINABLE SOCIETY, Gothenburg, Sweden, 12–16 June 2017. Published: 8 June 2017 Abstract: The aim of this research essay attempt to reveal the nature of information form the perspective of Marxist Philosophy. The nature of Information is the first question that philosophy of information science and technology research must be answered, thus the problem is still debated. According to Marxist dialectical materialism method to the essence of information has made the analysis and argumentation, points out the essence of information between what is and its internal contact things, and this contact information is presented. Due to the connection between the protean and endless things, thus produce the endless, full of beautiful things in eyes, each are not identical information. To grasp the nature of information, must pay attention to and the specific form of information and information processing, the reorganization, transmission, storage, use and so on. Keywords: information; nature; connection; philosophy of information 1. Introduction The development of information science and technology has spar ked the nature of information exploration after World War II. The question that ‘What is the nature of information?’ is always unable to avoid in information science and philosophical technology research.
    [Show full text]
  • The Implications of Naturalism As an Educational Philosophy in Jordan from the Perspectives of Childhood Education Teachers
    Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) Vol.7, No.11, 2016 The Implications of Naturalism as an Educational Philosophy in Jordan from the Perspectives of Childhood Education Teachers Omar Khasawneh Ahmed Khaled Mohammad Al Momani Al Ain University of Science and Technology Al Ain, United Arab Emirates & Yarmouk University- Jordan Abstract The purpose of this study was to identify the educational implications of naturalism as an educational philosophy from the Jordanian childhood education teachers' perspectives. Each philosophy simply represents a unique conviction concerning the nature of the teaching/learning process. This study could serve as a grounded theory for Jordanian childhood teachers to comprehend the need for a clear educational philosophy within the Jordanian educational system. In addition, this research study would draw Jordanian childhood teachers' interest to be acquainted more with the educational principles of such philosophical theory. The researchers employed a questionnaire consisted of twenty one items, which correspond to the educational principles of naturalism. The quantitative approach is used to gather data as one of the techniques and descriptive due to its suitability for this study. The study findings revealed that Jordanian childhood education teachers' perspectives toward the implications of naturalism as an educational philosophy were positive for all domains; curriculum, aims, and activities. Based on the findings, the researchers provided some relevant recommendations. Keywords : Naturalism, Educational Philosophy, Childhood Education Teachers, Jordan. 1. Introduction Teachers’ educational philosophies and their value systems influence their teaching styles and the way they deal with their students. So, the impact of teachers’ beliefs and values on teaching and learning is evident in each classroom (Conti, 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • The Tyranny of Method: a Pragmatic Defense of Philosophical Pluralism
    THE TYRANNY OF METHOD: A PRAGMATIC DEFENSE OF PHILOSOPHICAL PLURALISM Vincent M. Colapietro Abstract: The history of philosophy is in no small measure a series of attempts to institute a fail-safe method. In response to what they take to be the scandal of disagreement (disagreement itself being judged as scandalous), a number of historically influential philosophers (e.g., Descartes, Peirce, Husserl, and Carnap) have time and again tried to craft a method for guaranteeing agreement. In light of the failure of these attempts, this tendency might be seen as remotely analogous to what is called in psychoanalytic parlance a “repetition compulsion.” In any event, historical reflections on this repeated tendency promise to be illuminating. But there is a polemical purpose animating these historical reflections. The author tries, in light of these reflections, to render plausible the suggestion that this tendency amounts to a tyranny of method and, in turn, such tyranny results in an inevitable impoverishment of philosophical thought. THE TOPIC of my essay is best brought into focus by recalling a central figure in the history of Western philosophy. 1 This recollection is, however, far from methodologically innocent. My deliberate turn toward a pivotal moment in our intellectual history – in brief, my turn toward history – will provide the basis for my critique of what I am disposed to identify as the tyranny of method. This tyranny is not so much exercised by any particular method as by the repeated impulse to institute a philosophical method of allegedly revolutionary significance. Most often, this impulse is bound up with the hope that philosophy can transform itself into a science (an unquestionable form of certain knowledge) either by adopting the method of science itself (e.g., the efforts of C.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Social Science
    Philosophy of Social Science Philosophy of Social Science A New Introduction Edited by Nancy Cartwright and Eleonora Montuschi 1 1 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries © The several contributors 2014 The moral rights of the authors have been asserted First Edition published in 2014 Impression: 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Control Number: 2014938929 ISBN 978–0–19–964509–1 (hbk.) ISBN 978–0–19–964510–7 (pbk.) Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only.
    [Show full text]
  • Plato's Symposium: the Ethics of Desire
    Plato’s Symposium: The Ethics of Desire FRISBEE C. C. SHEFFIELD 1 Contents Introduction 1 1. Ero¯s and the Good Life 8 2. Socrates’ Speech: The Nature of Ero¯s 40 3. Socrates’ Speech: The Aim of Ero¯s 75 4. Socrates’ Speech: The Activity of Ero¯s 112 5. Socrates’ Speech: Concern for Others? 154 6. ‘Nothing to do with Human AVairs?’: Alcibiades’ Response to Socrates 183 7. Shadow Lovers: The Symposiasts and Socrates 207 Conclusion 225 Appendix : Socratic Psychology or Tripartition in the Symposium? 227 References 240 Index 249 Introduction In the Symposium Plato invites us to imagine the following scene: A pair of lovers are locked in an embrace and Hephaestus stands over them with his mending tools asking: ‘What is it that you human beings really want from each other?’ The lovers are puzzled, and he asks them again: ‘Is this your heart’s desire, for the two of you to become parts of the same whole, and never to separate, day or night? If that is your desire, I’d like to weld you together and join you into something whole, so that the two of you are made into one. Look at your love and see if this is what you desire: wouldn’t this be all that you want?’ No one, apparently, would think that mere sex is the reason each lover takes such deep joy in being with the other. The soul of each lover apparently longs for something else, but cannot say what it is. The beloved holds out the promise of something beyond itself, but that something lovers are unable to name.1 Hephaestus’ question is a pressing one.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is a Philosophical Analysis?
    JEFFREY C. KING WHAT IS A PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS? (Received 24 January 1996) It is common for philosophers to offer philosophical accounts or analyses, as they are sometimes called, of knowledge, autonomy, representation, (moral) goodness, reference, and even modesty.1 These philosophical analyses raise deep questions. What is it that is being analyzed (i.e. what sorts of things are the objects of analysis)? What sort of thing is the analysis itself (a proposition? sentence?)? Under what conditions is an analysis correct? How can a correct analysis be informative? How, if at all, does the production of philo- sophical analyses differ from what scientists do? The purpose of the present paper is to provide answers to these questions. The traditional answers to the ®rst and last of these questions are that concepts are the objects of philosophical analysis and that philo- sophical analyses differ from the results of scienti®c investigation in being conceptual analyses. Like many philosophers I am suspicious of the notions of concept and conceptual analysis as traditionally understood. Though the critique of these notions is beyond the scope of the present work, the answers I shall give to the questions raised above shall not invoke concepts (understood as things distinct from properties).2 I count it as a virtue of my account that it is able to provide answers to the questions raised above without an appeal to concepts. And to the extent that it has been felt that concepts are needed to answer these questions, the present account weakens the case for positing concepts. Before addressing these questions, however, we shall make the simplifying assumption that analyses are given in a ªcanonical formº.
    [Show full text]
  • The Theory of Descriptions 1. Bertrand Russell (1872-1970): Mathematician, Logician, and Philosopher
    Louis deRosset { Spring 2019 Russell: The Theory of Descriptions 1. Bertrand Russell (1872-1970): mathematician, logician, and philosopher. He's one of the founders of analytic philosophy. \On Denoting" is a founding document of analytic philosophy. It is a paradigm of philosophical analysis. An analysis of a concept/phenomenon c: a recipe for eliminating c-vocabulary from our theories which still captures all of the facts the c-vocabulary targets. FOR EXAMPLE: \The Name View Analysis of Identity." 2. Russell's target: Denoting Phrases By a \denoting phrase" I mean a phrase such as any one of the following: a man, some man, any man, every man, all men, the present King of England, the present King of France, the centre of mass of the Solar System at the first instant of the twentieth century, the revolution of the earth round the sun, the revolution of the sun round the earth. (479) Includes: • universals: \all F 's" (\each"/\every") • existentials: \some F " (\at least one") • indefinite descriptions: \an F " • definite descriptions: \the F " Later additions: • negative existentials: \no F 's" (480) • Genitives: \my F " (\your"/\their"/\Joe's"/etc.) (484) • Empty Proper Names: \Apollo", \Hamlet", etc. (491) Russell proposes to analyze denoting phrases. 3. Why Analyze Denoting Phrases? Russell's Project: The distinction between acquaintance and knowledge about is the distinction between the things we have presentation of, and the things we only reach by means of denoting phrases. [. ] In perception we have acquaintance with the objects of perception, and in thought we have acquaintance with objects of a more abstract logical character; but we do not necessarily have acquaintance with the objects denoted by phrases composed of words with whose meanings we are ac- quainted.
    [Show full text]
  • Generics Analysis Canberra Plan.Pdf
    Philosophical Perspectives, 26, Philosophy of Mind, 2012 CONCEPTS, ANALYSIS, GENERICS AND THE CANBERRA PLAN1 Mark Johnston Princeton University Sarah-Jane Leslie2 Princeton University My objection to meanings in the theory of meaning is not that they are abstract or that their identity conditions are obscure, but that they have no demonstrated use.3 —Donald Davidson “Truth and Meaning” From time to time it is said that defenders of conceptual analysis would do well to peruse the best empirically supported psychological theories of concepts, and then tailor their notions of conceptual analysis to those theories of what concepts are.4 As against this, there is an observation — traceable at least as far back to Gottlob Frege’s attack on psychologism in “The Thought” — that might well discourage philosophers from spending a week or two with the empirical psychological literature. The psychological literature is fundamentally concerned with mental representations, with the mental processes of using these in classification, characterization and inference, and with the sub-personal bases of these processes. The problem is that for many philosophers, concepts could not be mental items. (Jerry Fodor is a notable exception, we discuss him below.) We would like to set out this difference of focus in some detail and then propose a sort of translation manual, or at least a crucial translational hint, one which helps in moving between philosophical and psychological treatments of concepts. Then we will consider just how, given the translation, the relevant
    [Show full text]