DOCSLIB.ORG

Newsletter of the Faculty of Philosophy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Newsletter of the Faculty of Philosophy Philosophy at Cambridge Newsletter of the Faculty of Philosophy Issue 6 May 2009 From the Chairman D.H. Mellor Tim Crane When I came up to Clare, there were 70 applicants to read Philosophy. 34 were accepted. That was 1985. job at ICI to work on his PhD on This year 308 applied, but just 56 probability with Mary Hesse in HPS, were successful. This is not a blip. most of his work (and certainly his Since 2002 Philosophy’s application/ best work) has been in metaphysics. acceptance ratio has been way above When I wrote something for the overall University average, and the excellent Festschrift edited by higher still than the average in the Arts. Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra and Why is Philosophy so popular? One Hallvard Lillehammer in 2003 (Real explanation is that the subject is now Metaphysics), I commented that a firmly on the map in schools, as dominant theme of Hugh’s work is a GCSE and A-level option, often as what I called his ‘objectivism’ about a substantial element in the teaching metaphysics. This is his view that the of Religious Studies. Over 23,000 subject-matter of metaphysics is the UK students took Religious Studies or way it is regardless of what anyone Philosophy A-level last year, more than thinks about it. In the philosophy of French and German combined. This is probability, Hugh defended single-case objective chances or propensities; in reflected in the changing intellectual D.H. Mellor formation of our undergraduates: 2/3 the philosophy of time he defended of our current freshers have studied Emeritus Professor D.H. (Hugh) the reality of the temporal series Philosophy in some form at A-level. Mellor, who in 2008 celebrated his ordered in terms of earlier and later, But why Philosophy at Cambridge? 70th birthday, originally studied and argued that the ‘now’ is a kind It doesn’t take much investigation to chemical engineering at Pembroke of illusion. In the philosophy of discover that we offer a Rolls-Royce College. Although he had developed mind, Hugh argued against those education. Nowhere in the world can an interest in philosophy at school in like Thomas Nagel who think that the match it. And it will be even stronger Manchester, Hugh did not formally self is something outside the objective this coming year when Tim Crane study the subject until he visited the order of the world. Our metaphysics and Fraser MacBride join the Faculty. University of Minnesota as a Harkness should not mix facts about the way I know first-hand that they are Fellow. There he took a course on the we represent the phenomena with inspirational teachers. philosophy of science taught by the the phenomena themselves. Mastering facts and figures is one great Vienna Circle empiricist Herbert This is perhaps more of a of the first chores for an incoming Feigl. Feigl began his course by ‘philosophy of philosophy’ than you Chairman, but the principal pleasure announcing that there are three kinds would get from Hugh himself. Hugh is sustaining and developing our of philosophy: ‘the philosophy of tended to be impatient with people dynamic community. The Faculty nothing but’ (needless reductionism), who speculated about the essence of simply couldn’t operate without the ‘the philosophy of something more’ philosophy, thinking this a question goodwill and superb work of its (mysticism and spirituality) and Feigl’s of as little interest as the question extended network of philosophers – own preferred middle way, ‘the of the essence of science. “I’m not Junior and Senior Research Fellows, philosophy of what’s what’. interested in philosophy” he would College Teaching Officers, Affiliated ‘The philosophy of what’s what’ sometimes say “I’m interested in Lecturers, Directors of Studies, not might make a good subtitle for Hugh’s time, causation, probability, the to mention our army of top graduate collected papers. It nicely captures mind …”. Philosophy is its own students. I’ll end this note with a both his unpretentious, down-to-earth thing: there is truth and falsehood in tribute to all of them. attitude towards the subject, and his philosophy; the truth can be attained; respect for the facts revealed to us and our philosophical questions are, Alex Oliver by common sense and by science. on the whole, about exactly what they Chairman, Philosophy Faculty Board Although Hugh started off as a seem to be about: time, causation, philosopher of science, leaving his probability, the mind and so on. Philosophy at Cambridge page 1 May 2009 When I was a research student epistemology, which is not an area the enormous amount he has also in the 1980s, Hugh was one of the of philosophy in which he had much done for the Faculty and the dominant figures in the Cambridge interest. The inaugural is a fine piece, University. He was the prime mover scene. Tireless, tough and energetic but his greatest achievements have in the ambitious redesign of the Raised as a graduate supervisor, he also gave been in metaphysics: in particular in Faculty Building, and he also served as inspiring undergraduate lectures and the philosophy of time (Real Time Pro-Vice Chancellor, managing to do he was a formidable opponent at the was published in 1980, and the heavily at least three times as many things in Moral Sciences Club. Many visiting revised version Real Time II in 1998) a day than most academics. Since he speakers came away from meetings and in causation, where his dense retired, Hugh has taken a well-earned with their papers in severe need of and condensed book The Facts of break from all this kind of thing reconstruction (I know that mine Causation (1995) argued for some (though not from philosophy, publishing did). We coined the Philosophers’ very radical doctrines, for example his philosophical introduction to Lexicon-style definition: hughmellorate the view that causation is not a probability a few years ago) and has (verb, transitive) = to show a visiting relation. These works surely belong been spending more and more time speaker that their paper is completely among the best works of metaphysics on his other great passion, the theatre. worthless. But Hugh did not do this of the late twentieth century. To his students, Hugh is a model to score points; he wanted to get to Hugh’s work in metaphysics fits of how to take philosophy seriously the heart of the matter, without any squarely into a Cambridge tradition without being solemn about it; waffle and without affectation. which is hard to define but easy how to have high standards in the Some found Hugh just too dogmatic to recognise – a tradition which in subject without being crippled by in those days, and even those who the 20th century included Bertrand the enormity of the problems or didn’t would sometimes poke fun at Russell, F.P. Ramsey, C.D. Broad and the weight of the tradition; how to him affectionately. I remember Jeremy R.B. Braithwaite. Hugh has always take account of the known facts Butterfield in a lecture describing a view said how much he owed to Ramsey, without slavish devotion to science; about time as what Hugh believes, and but he also owed a lot to Ramsey’s and how the first and guiding aim of adding: “He won’t tell you he believes friend Braithwaite, who would also philosophers should be to aim to say it. He’ll tell you it’s true. That’s his way become a friend of Hugh’s. He also what is true, without fuss and without of saying he believes it”. And a friend claims as his other influences Hans obscurity. The philosophy of what’s summed up Hugh’s inaugural lecture, Reichenbach, and the Australian what, in other words. The Warrant of Induction in two metaphysics of J.J.C. Smart, D.M. sentences: “How do we know the future Armstrong, Frank Jackson and Tim Crane (PhD 1989), Professor will be like the past? Because it will!”. David Lewis. of Philosophy, UCL. He joins the It was odd, in a way, that Hugh Hugh’s substantial achievements in Faculty as Knightbridge Professor should give his inaugural lecture on philosophy should not over-shadow in September 2009 Philosophy at Cambridge page 2 May 2009 An Oxford Lad at Cambridge Sidney A. Josephs I came up to Trinity in 1957, on a accommodate the expected larger I drove down from London early on Cambridge Bursary for Adult students, than usual audience. Saturday mornings, and spent the day to read Moral Sciences (Neither moral My third year was a shambles. in supervisions with my students, before nor scientific!). I was 24 years old and Lacking a classical background I driving back to my pad in the then had been working on the production had to take the History of Modern poorest part of Chelsea (aptly named line in one of the Oxford car factories. Philosophy option for Part II, which, ‘The World’s End’!). I’m sure that such a I had become interested in philosophy with the exception of David Hume, situation would not be tolerated today! at the age of 16, when I started seeking held little interest for me. This lack For more than ten years after I left logical arguments to support my of interest and motivation, allied to Cambridge, in addition to my full-time empirical atheism. a delightful, but time-consuming and job in publishing, I taught evening I was fortunate, from 1954–56, to emotionally demanding love affair with classes in philosophy for the Extra- attend, in Oxford, a Workers’ Education an undergraduate from Newnham Mural Boards of Cambridge, London Association evening class in philosophy (no, reader, I did not marry her), and, subsequently, Oxford Universities.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Peter Fisher Epstein Pembroke College University of Cambridge Curriculum Vitae CB2 1RF [email protected] United Kingdom Peterfisherepstein.Com
    Peter Fisher Epstein Pembroke College University of Cambridge Curriculum Vitae CB2 1RF [email protected] United Kingdom peterfisherepstein.com EMPLOYMENT Pembroke College, University of Cambridge, 2017-2020 Junior Research Fellow (Randall Dillard Research Fellowship) Brandeis University, Department of Philosophy, 2020- Assistant Professor of Philosophy (tenure-track) VISITING POSITION New York University, Department of Philosophy, 2017-2019 Visiting Scholar AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION Philosophy of Mind Epistemology (including Formal Epistemology) Philosophy of Science AREAS OF COMPETENCE Metaphysics Philosophy of Physics Early Modern Philosophy EDUCATION University of California, Berkeley, 2008-2017 Ph.D., Philosophy, August 2017 Dissertation: Sensible Concepts: Experience and the A Priori (Committee: John Campbell (co-chair); Barry Stroud (co-chair); Geoffrey Lee; Tania Lombrozo) Harvard University, 2000-2004 A.B., summa cum laude, Philosophy (with Certificate in Mind, Brain, and Behavior), June 2004 Thesis: Comparing Qualia (Supervisor: Susanna Siegel; Readers: Mike Martin and Richard Heck) Awarded George Plimpton Adams Prize for best dissertation or undergraduate thesis in philosophy PUBLICATIONS “Shape Perception in a Relativistic Universe,” Mind (2018) “A Priori Concepts in Euclidean Proof,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (2018) “The Fine-Tuning Argument and the Requirement of Total Evidence,” Philosophy of Science (2017) GRANTS AND FELLOWSHIPS “Grounding Sensible Qualities” Project (Co-Principal Investigator), New Directions
    [Show full text]
  • Is There a Perceptual Relation?
    3 Is There a Perceptual Relation? Tim Crane 1INTRODUCTION P. F. Strawson argued that ‘mature sensible experience (in general) presents itself as ...an immediate consciousness of the existence of things outside us’ (1979: 97). He began his defence of this very natural idea by asking how someone might typically give a description of their current visual experience, and offered this example of such a description: ‘I see the red light of the setting sun filtering through the black and thickly clustered branches of the elms; I see the dappled deer grazing in groups on the vivid green grass’ (1979: 97). In other words, in describing experience, we tend to describe the objects of experience—the things which we experience—and the ways they are when we are experiencing them. Some go further. According to Heidegger: We never ...originally and really perceive a throng of sensations, e.g., tones and noises, in the appearance of things ...; rather, we hear the storm whistling in the chimney, we hear the three-engine aeroplane, we hear the Mercedes in immediate distinction from the Volkswagen. Much closer to us than any sensations are the things themselves. We hear the door slam in the house, and never hear acoustic sensations or mere sounds. (1935: 156; quoted by Smith 2002: 105) Whether or not we all want to agree with Heidegger that we have immediate consciousness of the difference between a Volkswagen and a Mercedes, many of us will agree with him that in normal perceptual experience the ‘things them- selves’ seem much closer to us than a ‘throng of sensations’.
    [Show full text]
  • Intentionality As the Mark of the Mental Tim Crane
    From: Contemporary Issues in the Philosophy of Mind, ed. Anthony O’Hear (1998) Intentionality as the mark of the mental Tim Crane 1. BRENTANO’S THESIS ‘It is of the very nature of consciousness to be intentional’ said Jean-Paul Sartre, ‘and a consciousness that ceases to be a consciousness of something would ipso facto cease to exist’.1 Sartre here endorses the central doctrine of Husserl’s phenomenology, itself inspired by a famous idea of Brentano’s: that intentionality, the mind’s ‘direction upon its objects’, is what is distinctive of mental phenomena. Brentano’s originality does not lie in pointing out the existence of intentionality, or in inventing the terminology, which derives from scholastic discussions of concepts or intentiones.2 Rather, his originality consists in his claim that the concept of intentionality marks out the subject matter of psychology: the mental. His view was that intentionality ‘is characteristic exclusively of mental phenomena. No physical phenomenon manifests anything like it’.3 This is Brentano’s thesis that intentionality is the mark of the mental. Despite the centrality of the concept of intentionality in contemporary philosophy of mind, and despite the customary homage paid to Brentano as the one who revived the terminology and placed the concept at the centre of philosophy, Brentano’s thesis is widely rejected by contemporary philosophers of mind. What is more, its rejection is not something which is thought to require substantial philosophical argument. Rather, the falsity of the thesis is taken as a starting-point in many contemporary discussions of intentionality, something so obvious that it only needs to be stated to be recognised as true.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae Alex Grzankowski (Pronounced: Griz - En - Cow - Ski)
    Curriculum Vitae Alex Grzankowski (pronounced: griz - en - cow - ski) Department of Philosophy Birkbeck College Malet Street London WC1E 7HX e: [email protected] w: alexgrzankowski.com p: +44 (0)749 0121687 EMPLOYMENT (2016-) Lecturer, Birkbeck, University of London (2015-2016) Researcher for ‘New Directions in the Study of Mind’, Postdoctoral Research Affiliate in Darwin College, and Temporary Lecturer, University of Cambridge (2013-2016) Assistant Professor, Texas Tech University EDUCATION (2010-2013) PhD, Philosophy, The University of Texas, Austin (2006-2010) MA, Philosophy, The University of Texas, Austin (2004) BA, Philosophy, Cornell University (magna cum laude) PUBLICATIONS Peer-reviewed Articles (forthcoming) ‘A Relational Theory Of Non-Propositional Attitudes’ –in Non-Propositional Intentionality (forthcoming) ‘The Determinable-Determinate Relation Can’t Save Adverbialism’ –Analysis (2017) ‘The Real Trouble With Recalcitrant Emotions’ –Erkenntnis (2016) ‘Limits of Propositionalism’ –Inquiry (2015) ‘Pictures Have Propositional Content’ –Review of Philosophy and Psychology, Special Issue on Pictorial and Spatial Representation (2014) ‘Attitudes Towards Objects’ –Noûs (2013) ‘Non-Propositional Attitudes’ –Philosophy Compass (2013) ‘ “Can” And The Consequence Argument’ –Ratio (2012) ‘Not All Attitudes Are Propositional’ –European Journal of Philosophy Edited Book (forthcoming) Non-Propositional Intentionality (co-edited with Michelle Montague) –under contract with Oxford University Press CV / ALEX GRZANKOWSKI 2 PRESENTATIONS (2016) ‘On The Explanatory Role Of Propositions’ (With Ray Buchanan) –44th Annual Meeting of the Society for Exact Philosophy ‘Having Content and the Role of Abstract Objects in a Theory of Mind’ –University of Fribourg, Experience and Reason Colloquium ‘The Theory-Ladenness of Recalcitrant Emotions’ (With Raamy Majeed) –12th Mind Network Meeting (2015) ‘A Relational Theory of Non-Propositional Attitudes’ –University of St.
    [Show full text]
  • Mellon Seminars on Ethics, Philosophy and Anthropology Hallvard Lillehammer
    Philosophy at Cambridge Newsletter of the Faculty of Philosophy Issue 9 May 2012 ISSN 2046-9632 From the Chair Tim Crane I took over as Chair of the Faculty from Simon Blackburn on his retirement last year. We said goodbye formally to Simon – shown on the right appreciating one of his retirement gifts – at a lovely party at Trinity in the summer. Fortunately, Simon will still be living in Cambridge for most of the year, so we haven’t lost him altogether. Since then it’s been a busy year. Huw Price has stepped into Simon’s chair (if that is what one does with a chair) and is already making his mark on the Faculty with workshops, conferences and new initiatives, like the new cross-Cambridge Philosophy of Science group (which Huw has named with the catchy acronym ‘CAMPOS’: see our interview on p. 4). But all members of the Faculty have been busy too this year, with what seems to be a record number of conferences on ethics, logic and the philosophy of mind. Details of these events can be found on our website; and of course, Simon Blackburn at his retirement garden party, Trinity College Cambridge Philosophy alumni are always very welcome to attend these. three new lecturers in February. We were philosophy; she comes to Cambridge Richard Holton and Rae Langton from looking to appoint a lecturer in the history from a lectureship at the University of East MIT have been our Faculty Visitors this year, of philosophy (an area where we have not Anglia. Tim is currently a research fellow at and have made a tremendous contribution been strong for a while) and to strengthen St John’s, Cambridge, and did his PhD in in giving talks, attending seminars and just our profile in ethics, especially important the Faculty.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mechanical Mind
    The Mechanical Mind How can the human mind represent the external world? What is thought, and can it be studied scientifically? Should we think of the mind as a kind of machine? Is the mind a computer? Can a computer think? Tim Crane sets out to answer these questions and more in a lively and straightforward way, presuming no prior knowledge of philosophy or related disciplines. Since its first publication The Mechanical Mind has introduced thousands of people to some of the most important ideas in contemporary philosophy of mind. Crane explains the fundamental ideas that cut across philosophy of mind, artificial intelligence and cognitive science: what the mind–body problem is; what a computer is and how it works; what thoughts are and how computers and minds might have them. He examines different theories of the mind from dualist to eliminativist, and questions whether there can be thought without language and whether the mind is subject to the same causal laws as natural phenomena. The result is a fascinating exploration of the theories and arguments surrounding the notions of thought and representation. This third edition has been fully revised and updated, and includes a wholly new chapter on externalism about mental content and the extended and embodied mind. There is a stronger emphasis on the environmental and bodily context in which thought occurs. Many chapters have been reorganised to make the reader’s passage through the book easier. The book now contains a much more detailed guide to further reading, and the chronology and the glossary of technical terms have also been updated.
    [Show full text]
  • Mental Substances1
    From: Minds and Persons edited by Anthony O’Hear (Cambridge University Press 2003) Mental Substances1 Tim Crane University College London 1. Do minds exist? Philosophers of mind typically conduct their discussions in terms of mental events, mental processes, mental properties, mental states – but rarely in terms of minds themselves. Sometimes this neglect is explicitly acknowledged. Donald Davidson, for example, writes that ‘there are no such things as minds, but people have mental properties, which is to say that certain psychological predicates are true of them. These properties are constantly changing, and such changes are mental events’.2 Hilary Putnam agrees, though for somewhat different reasons: The view I have long defended is that the mind is not a thing; talk of our minds is talk of world-involving capabilities that we have and activities that we engage in. As Dewey succinctly put it, “Mind is primarily a verb. It denotes all the ways in which we deal consciously and expressly with the situation in which we find ourselves. Unfortunately, an influential manner of thinking has changed modes of action into an underlying substance that performs the activities in question. It has treated mind as an independent entity which attends, purposes, cares and remembers”. But the traditional view, by treating mental states as states of the “underlying substance”, makes them properties of something “inside”, and, if one is a materialist philosopher, that means properties of our brains. So the next problem naturally seems to be: “Which neurological properties of our brains do these mental properties ‘reduce’ to?” For how could our brains have properties that aren’t neurological? And this is how materialist philosophers saw the problem until the advent of such new alternatives in the philosophy of mind and philosophy of language as Functionalism and Semantic Externalism.3 1 This paper is intended as a preliminary attempt to bring together issues in the mainstream of the philosophy of mind and the personal identity debate.
    [Show full text]
  • Is There a Perceptual Relation?
    From T. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (eds.) Perceptual Experience (Oxford: Oxford University Press) Is there a perceptual relation? Tim Crane University College London 1. Introduction P.F. Strawson argued that ‘mature sensible experience (in general) presents itself as … an immediate consciousness of the existence of things outside us’ (1979: 97). He began his defence of this very natural idea by asking how someone might typically give a description of their current visual experience, and offered this example of such a description: ‘I see the red light of the setting sun filtering through the black and thickly clustered branches of the elms; I see the dappled deer grazing in groups on the vivid green grass…’ (1979: 97). In other words, in describing experience, we tend to describe the objects of experience – the things which we experience – and the ways they are when we are experiencing them. Some go further. According to Heidegger, We never … originally and really perceive a throng of sensations, e.g., tones and noises, in the appearance of things…; rather, we hear the storm whistling in the chimney, we hear the three-engine aeroplane, we hear the Mercedes in immediate distinction from the Volkswagen. Much closer to us than any sensations are the things themselves. We hear the door slam in the house, and never hear acoustic sensations or mere sounds. (Heidegger 1935: 156; quoted by Smith 2002: 105) 1 Whether or not we all want to agree with Heidegger that we have immediate consciousness of the difference between a Volkswagen and a Mercedes, many of us will agree with him that in normal perceptual experience the ‘things themselves’ seem much closer to us than a ‘throng of sensations’.
    [Show full text]
  • Michelle Montague Curriculum Vitae
    MICHELLE MONTAGUE CURRICULUM VITAE Email: [email protected] ACADEMIC POSITIONS University of Texas at Austin, Associate Professor 2012-present University of Bristol, Senior Lecturer, 2011-2013 University of Bristol, Lecturer 2008-2011 University of California, Irvine, Assistant Professor, 2002-07 VISITING POSITIONS College of Charleston, Visiting Professor, Self-Knowledge NEH summer Course 2018 Central European University, Visiting Professor, summer Course 2016 University of Copenhagen, Visiting Professor, summer course 2015 Australian National University, Visiting Research Fellow, summer 2012 Princeton University, Visiting Scholar, Fall 2011 Center for Subjectivity Research, University of Copenhagen, Visiting Research Fellow, Spring 2011 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Visiting Associate Professor, Spring 2010 University of Oxford, St. John’s College and St. Catherine’s College, Stipendiary Lecturer, 2007-08 Institute of Philosophy, University of London, Visiting Fellow, 2007-08 EDUCATION Ph.D. 2002 Philosophy. University of Colorado, Boulder M.A. 2000 Philosophy. University of Colorado, Boulder B.A. 1994 Philosophy. University of California, Berkeley AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION Philosophy of Mind, Metaphysics AREAS OF COMPETENCE Philosophy of Language, History of Analytic Philosophy PUBLICATIONS Book The Given: Experience and its Content. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2016). Edited Collections Non-Propositional Intentionality (co-edited with Alex Grzankowski). Oxford: Oxford University Press (2018). Cognitive Phenomenology (co-edited with Tim Bayne). Oxford: Oxford University Press (2011). Philosophical Writings by P.F. Strawson (co-edited with Galen Strawson) Oxford: Oxford University Press (2011). Articles 1. “Cognitive Phenomenology, Sensory Phenomenology, and Rationality” in A. Sullivan (ed) Sensations, Thoughts, Language: Essays in honor of Brain Loar. Routledge (forthcoming). 2. “The Sense/Cognition Distinction” Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy (forthcoming).
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy News 7.Pdf
    Philosophy at Cambridge Newsletter of the Faculty of Philosophy Issue 7 May 2010 From the Chairman Simon Blackburn Three splendid lectures enlivened the year. of meeting the target of £2 million Roger Scruton gave a talk on music and required to fund the 1896 Chair of human values to a packed audience at the Philosophy. As I write this, the School Alumni Weekend, bravely overcoming a of Arts and Humanities has passed our distracting balletic performance by the request for the position to be formally technician who was apparently needed to named the Bertrand Russell Professorship cope with the innovation of showing slides of Philosophy up to the General Board, and music together. As compensation, the where we expect it to be approved. We subsequent dinner in Roger’s honour was decided that Russell deserved the honour ravished by an impromptu performance of not only for his intellectual eminence, songs from Russia and Kazakhstan, by the but also for his visibility as a public face very talented partner of one of our guests. of philosophy. Barry Smith’s lecture on the philosophy Meeting the goal of this appeal is a of wine-tasting at the Cambridge Festival terrific achievement, and one of which of Ideas also saw academic delight we in the Faculty, and our alumni, can be mingled with more sensual pleasure as very proud. It is particularly gratifying that the audience thoughtfully reflected upon almost one hundred people gave their the importance of terroir and knowingly support to the cause. The Chair is now compared Pinot Noirs. Philip Pettit gave the independent of the bitter financial winds Routledge Lecture in Philosophy, offering blowing around many posts in academe, us a lucid and illuminating account of even in Cambridge.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mechanical Mind
    The Mechanical Mind How can the human mind represent the external world? What is thought, and can it be studied scientifi cally? Does it help to think of the mind as a kind of machine? Tim Crane sets out to answer questions like these in a lively and straightforward way, presuming no prior knowledge of philosophy or related disciplines. Since its fi rst publication in 1995, The Mechanical Mind has introduced thousands of people to some of the most important ideas in contemporary philosophy of mind. Tim Crane explains some fundamental ideas that cut across philosophy of mind, artifi cial intelligence and cognitive science: what the mind–body problem is; what a computer is and how it works; what thoughts are and how computers and minds might have them. He examines different models of the mind from dualist to eliminativist, and questions whether there can be thought without language and whether the mind is subject to the same causal laws as natural phe- nomena. The result is a fascinating exploration of the theories and arguments surrounding the notions of thought and representation. This edition has been fully revised and updated, and includes a new chapter on consciousness and new sections on modularity and evolutionary psychology. There are also guides for further reading, a chronology and a new glossary of terms such as Mentalese, con- nectionism and intentionality. The Mechanical Mind is accessible to the general reader as well as students, and to anyone interested in the mechanisms of our minds. Tim Crane is Professor of Philosophy at University College London and Director of the Philosophy Programme of the School of Advanced Study, University of London.
    [Show full text]
  • Perception General Reading List
    Perception: General Reading List Sense-Datum and Adverbial Theories of Perception Useful Collections Main Reading F. Jackson, Perception, particularly chs. 1-4 J. Dancy, ed., Perceptual Knowledge (Oxford: OUP, 1988) now out of print H. Robinson, Perception, in particular Chs. III, VI & VIII R. J. Swartz, ed., Perceiving, Sensing & Knowing (Los Angeles: Campus, 1966) Thompson Clarke, ‘Seeing Surfaces and Physical Objects’, in Max Black, ed., Philosophy in America Tim Crane, ed.,The Contents of Experience (Cambridge: CUP, 1992) Further Reading Books on Perception Tom Baldwin, G.E. Moore, Ch. VIII A.D. Smith, The Problem of Perception John Foster, The Nature of Perception John Foster, The Nature of Perception M. Perkins, Sensing the World J.J. Valberg, The Puzzle of Experience, B. O’Shaughnessy, ‘Seeing the Light’, in Aristotelian Society, 1984-5 F. Jackson, Perception: A Representative Approach M. Tye, ‘The Adverbial Approach to Visual Experience’, Philosophical Review, 1984 J.L. Austin, Sense & Sensibilia T. Baldwin, ‘The Projective Theory of Content’, in Crane Hilary Putnam, The Threefold Cord W. Sellars, Science & Metaphysics, Chs. 1 & 2 H. Robinson, Perception B. O’Shaughnessy, The Will, Vol. 1 Ch. 5 Introductory Reading Intentional Theories of Perception P.F. Strawson, ‘Perception & Its Objects’, in G.F.Macdonald, ed., Perception & Identity, reprinted in Main Reading Dancy Gilbert Harman, ‘The Intrinsic Quality of Experience’, in Philosophical Perspectives 4, reprinted in Tim Crane, Introduction to The Contents of Experience W. Lycan, ed., Mind & Cognition, second edition; also in Harman’s collected papers, J. Foster, A.J.Ayer, Ch.2 sec. X Reasoning, Meaning & Mind Direct Perception D.
    [Show full text]