Lexicon of Arguments

 Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
I 180
Radical interpretation/Davidson/McDowell: ultimately, the field linguist picks up norms from the inner perspective (language, coherence, not ratio stimulus/world).
>Radical interpretation, >Understanding/McDowell, >Idiolect, >Language behavior.
I 181
McDowellVsRorty: if he forbids a normative view for the field linguist (and thus proposes an external perspective of a purely causal nature), then he deprives us of the importance of the transition from the initial predicament to the achieved interpretation.
I 182
McDowellVsRorty: ultimately represents a dualism of nature and reason. Therefore, as a pragmatist, he can only be successful in some cases. He himself does not see this as a dualism. He speaks of it (Rorty): "patiently explaining that norms are something different than descriptions."
>New description/Rorty, >Norm/McDowell, >Dualism.

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.