Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Radical interpretation, philosophy: is an expression for a family of thought experiments, which has the object of the translation of a completely foreign language into the language of the interpreter, which the interpreter does not understand at all. See also translation, indeterminacy, Gavagai.
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

Books on Amazon
IV 70
Radical interpretation/RI/Davidson/Fodor/Lepore: 1) specify empirical evidence - 2) since different ways of selecting evidence lead to different truth theories, the choice must be justified by the RI theory. - Problem: the truth theory cannot be attributed regardless of the correctness of the meaning theory.
VI 72
Evidence/Quine: everything that is accessible to RI - (language learning of the child, stimuli).
IV 77
Similarity spaces/Quine/Fodor/Lepore: is not available to the radical interpreter - (because different culture must be assumed, other than in language learning).
IV 86
Holism/RI/Davidson/Fodor/Lepore: his argument for holism is based on his assumption that individual sentences - E.g. Kurt belongs to the German-speaking Community and Kurt holds true: It s raining on Saturday afternoon and it s raining around Kurt on Saturday afternoon - law-like (laws). - Fodor/LeporeVsDavidson: the generalizations thereof E.g. (x)(t)(if x belongs to the German-speaking community, then (x holds it rains to be true at t iff it is raining in the vicinity of x at t) - do not support counterfactual conditionals and are therefore not law-like according to Davidson s Def law - no support of Counterfactual Conditionals e.g. the meaning of it s raining could be: the cat is on the mat - then it does not follow that the cat is not on the mat when it is not raining .
IV 87
Solution: ...for a relation R and every speaker S... - then nomological - but not yet RI - lawlikeness: we only had to assume it because of conventionality of language. - problem: by definition, RI cannot find out the conventionality.
IV 89
RI/Fodor/Lepore: our image of RI is much richer than that of Davidson.
IV 90
Problem: the nomological approach is not holistic.
IV 88
Conventionality/language/RI/Fodor/Lepore: by definition, C. is nothing that the radical interpreter can find out! - E.g. non-German-seakers don t say "Hund" when the are referring to a dog.

J. Fodor/E. Lepore
Holism Cambridge USA Oxford UK 1992

> Counter arguments against Fodor

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-25