|Intentionality: intentionality is the ability of people and higher animals to relate to and react to circumstances such as things and states. Concepts, words, and sentences also refer to something but have no intentionality. This linguistic relating-to is called reference instead._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. |
Books on Amazon
|Rorty VI 27
Rorty: "intentional stance"/Intentional position/Dennett: is made possible through the detection of a Davidson pattern. The pattern of this rationality is the same as that of the truth. Neither language without rationality, nor one of them without truth.
SearleVsDennett: "as-if intentionality".
Intentionality/DennettVsSearle: but you have to start somewhere (if you want to avoid metaphysics). The first step in the right direction is hardly recognizable as a step towards meaning.
Def intentional position/Dennett: an attempt to determine what the designer (or Mother Nature) had in mind.
He often allows large jumps in the conclusions without the ignorance of the underlying physics disturbing them.
E.g. Antikythera mechanism. the fact that he was a planetarium results from the fact that it was a good planetarium!
E.g. Martians wonder why there is so much excess capacity in the computer: Reason: chips became so cheap. This is a historical explanation, but it emanates from the intentional stance.
E.g. Flog Archaeopteryx? They are not sure, but found that his claws were ideal for sitting on tree branches! So how did he get up there ...? I 321
Def design stand point/Dennett: eg an alarm clock is (as opposed to stone) a designed object and is accessible to a sophisticated kind of predictions. (According to the design standpoint). When I press the buttons, something will happen a few hours later.
But I do not need to know the laws of physics for that.
Intentional position/Dennett: E.g. chess computer. Nothing in the laws of physics forces the chess computer to make the next move, but nothing in its design either.
Brandom I 109
Intention/Intentionality/Dennett: stance-stance: asserts that one cannot distinguish whether something really is an intentional system and whether it is being treated as such appropriately.
The I 592ff
Intentionality/Real/Derived/Dennett: E.g. freezing: robot must be able to act independently - must believe in reward, but develops self-interest - Question: intentionality still derived? - If so, then our own is also merely derived - but that s splitting hairs - Important Argument: we ourselves are only those survival machines for our genes
Intentionality/SearleVsDennett: no machine, no vending machine either.
Freezing/DennettVsSearle: at some time intentionality is no longer derived, but real!._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.
Darwins gefährliches Erbe Hamburg 1997
Spielarten des Geistes Gütersloh 1999
Der Spiegel der Natur Frankfurt 1997
Philosophie & die Zukunft Frankfurt 2000
Kontingenz, Ironie und Solidarität Frankfurt 1992
Eine Kultur ohne Zentrum Stuttgart 1993
Solidarität oder Objektivität? Stuttgart 1998
Wahrheit und Fortschritt Frankfurt 2000
Expressive Vernunft Frankfurt 2000
Begründen und Begreifen Frankfurt 2001