Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.
The author or concept searched is found in the following 10 entries.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Colour | Putnam | III 118 On Bernard Williams' approach to the "absoluteness" of the world: Putnam: the world "independent of our experience" is a cold world. Values (as well as colors) are not found in the world, but projected onto the world. III 118/119 Values are even worse off than colors, because after we discover that they are projections, we lose our ability to use them. This is not the case with color classifications. They belong more to a biological world than to a "social world". ((s) Connection: PutnamVsWilliams, B., PutnamVs"Absolute World", VsB. Williams' approach of an "absoluteness" of the world). >Absoluteness. III 125 Colors: the situation does not become more favourable (objective) if we look at colors instead of heat. Color vision is not a mere reaction of our physiology and by no means without relationships to objective characteristics of the surface we are looking at. Disjunction/definition/Putnam: for example, a surface is green if it refuses to reflect a significant amount of red light relative to the other colors (including green). Here, the boundaries remain vague but it explains that different compositions can produce the same color impression. III 126 Colors/Putnam: e.g. "standard green": standard green has no intersubjective stability but from this does not follow that there are no clear cases of green/not green. III 162 Saussure assumed that the idea of a system of differences from the individual elements should be transferred to language as a whole. But in fact, different languages do not have the same semantic opposites. One language may have only four basic colors, another 7. Such a way out quickly leads to the conclusion that meanings are reserved for specific individual languages. And from here it is not far to the thought that they are reserved for individual "texts". According to this thesis, two languages never express the same meanings. Thus, even the concept of the sign's meaning, which is detachable from the sign itself, becomes obsolete (PutnamVsSaussure). --- V 114 Colors/functionalism/Putnam: when we adopt the "functionalist" theory of subjective colors: "a sensation is a blue sensation when it has the role of signaling the presence of objective blue in the environment": this theory captures a meaning of the expression "blue sensation", but not its desired "qualitative" sense. If this functional role were identical to the qualitative character, one could not say that the quality of the sensation has changed. But the quality has changed. In this case, quality does not seem to be a functional state (VsFunctionalism). >Functionalism. |
Putnam I Hilary Putnam Von einem Realistischen Standpunkt In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Frankfurt 1993 Putnam I (a) Hilary Putnam Explanation and Reference, In: Glenn Pearce & Patrick Maynard (eds.), Conceptual Change. D. Reidel. pp. 196--214 (1973) In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (b) Hilary Putnam Language and Reality, in: Mind, Language and Reality: Philosophical Papers, Volume 2. Cambridge University Press. pp. 272-90 (1995 In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (c) Hilary Putnam What is Realism? in: Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 76 (1975):pp. 177 - 194. In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (d) Hilary Putnam Models and Reality, Journal of Symbolic Logic 45 (3), 1980:pp. 464-482. In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (e) Hilary Putnam Reference and Truth In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (f) Hilary Putnam How to Be an Internal Realist and a Transcendental Idealist (at the Same Time) in: R. Haller/W. Grassl (eds): Sprache, Logik und Philosophie, Akten des 4. Internationalen Wittgenstein-Symposiums, 1979 In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (g) Hilary Putnam Why there isn’t a ready-made world, Synthese 51 (2):205--228 (1982) In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (h) Hilary Putnam Pourqui les Philosophes? in: A: Jacob (ed.) L’Encyclopédie PHilosophieque Universelle, Paris 1986 In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (i) Hilary Putnam Realism with a Human Face, Cambridge/MA 1990 In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (k) Hilary Putnam "Irrealism and Deconstruction", 6. Giford Lecture, St. Andrews 1990, in: H. Putnam, Renewing Philosophy (The Gifford Lectures), Cambridge/MA 1992, pp. 108-133 In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam II Hilary Putnam Representation and Reality, Cambridge/MA 1988 German Edition: Repräsentation und Realität Frankfurt 1999 Putnam III Hilary Putnam Renewing Philosophy (The Gifford Lectures), Cambridge/MA 1992 German Edition: Für eine Erneuerung der Philosophie Stuttgart 1997 Putnam IV Hilary Putnam "Minds and Machines", in: Sidney Hook (ed.) Dimensions of Mind, New York 1960, pp. 138-164 In Künstliche Intelligenz, Walther Ch. Zimmerli/Stefan Wolf Stuttgart 1994 Putnam V Hilary Putnam Reason, Truth and History, Cambridge/MA 1981 German Edition: Vernunft, Wahrheit und Geschichte Frankfurt 1990 Putnam VI Hilary Putnam "Realism and Reason", Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association (1976) pp. 483-98 In Truth and Meaning, Paul Horwich Aldershot 1994 Putnam VII Hilary Putnam "A Defense of Internal Realism" in: James Conant (ed.)Realism with a Human Face, Cambridge/MA 1990 pp. 30-43 In Theories of Truth, Paul Horwich Aldershot 1994 SocPut I Robert D. Putnam Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community New York 2000 |
| Experience | Stalnaker | I 219 Inner experiences/Wittgenstein/Stalnaker: 1. Wittgenstein is skeptical about the inner experience. 2. VerificationismVsInternalism. >VerificationismVsinternalism. Cf. >Inner objects, >Mentalism, >Mental Objects. Example: Inverted Spectra/Stalnaker: If this were possible, how could we report about it? Both persons (one of whom would have reversed spectra) would call red things red. The only thing that would be different would be the inner experiences, experiences that we cannot even compare because we are not in the position to do so. Recently the problem is being taken more seriously again. This raises above all problems of VsFunctionalism and VsMaterialism. It has consequences for the notion of mind, or that of consciousness and intentionality. >Inverted spectra/Stalnaker, >Other Minds, >Functionalism. |
Stalnaker I R. Stalnaker Ways a World may be Oxford New York 2003 |
| Folk Psychology | Burge | Shiffer I 37 BurgeVsFolk Psychology/Intention-Based Semantics//IBS/BurgeVsIBS/BurgeVsGrice/Schiffer: Burge's counter-examples are more interesting. They differ from the twin-earth examples in two points: (I) at first sight they also make a strong objection VsIBS by seemingly demonstrating that the content of belief is sometimes a function of the meaning of the word in the linguistic community. >Intentions. I 38 (II) Def "Environment-Dependent"/Role/Terminology/Burge/Schiffer/: let's say: a functional role is dependent on the environment if we cannot know whether a system is in a state that has the role F without knowing what the environment looks like. >Circumstances, >Environment. Dependent on the Environment: e.g. "every token of x is caused in y when he sees a cat": this is environment-dependent. ((s)> Putnam: "cat-single-sign-trigger"). CSF: common-sense functionalism Twin EarthVsCSF/Schiffer: the arguments work there, because they are environment-independent. This may spur a hope for a scientific functionalism, for a theory with T-correlated functional roles that are environment-dependent. BurgeVsFunctionalism: (Burge 1979(3), example turned classic, also Burge 1982a(1), 1982b(2)): E.g. Alfred's use of "arthritis" involves more than the correct use limited to inflammation of the joints. He thinks it is similar to rheumatism and says "I have arthritis in the thigh". Burge: Alfred has a wrong belief. Shiffer dito. w: World where Alfred has the belief that he has arthritis in the thigh. In w, Alfred has the belief that he has arthritis in the thigh w' is a possible world that is different from the other only in that Alfred's use of "arthritis" is correct there. It is accepted by the language community. (s) The language community mistakenly believes that it is possible to have arthritis in the thigh. The community as a whole is wrong (except for the doctors)). Then, Alfred's belief there is also true. Important Point/Burge: In w', Alfred does not have the belief that he has arthritis in the thigh. For this belief is false (because arthritis is only an inflammation of the joints. But the belief he has is true on its own!) ((s) He has the belief that he has a disease of which it is generally believed that he could have in the thigh. His word "arthritis" then has a different content than in w). BurgeVsCSF: in w , Alfred is in exactly the same T* -correlated states as we are in w. Therefore, if CSF were correct, he would express the same belief in both. But he does not. Therefore, CSF must be incorrect. ((s) Alfred does not assert in w' to believe this (and does not believe it), but then there are two differences between w and w'?). >Objects of belief, >Objects of thought. 1. Tyler Burge: 1982a. “Two Thought Experiments Reviewed.” In: Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 23.2 : 284–293. 2. Tyler Burge: 1982b. "Other Bodies" In: Andrew Woodfield (Hg.): Thought and Object. New York: Oxford. 3. Tyler Burge: 1979. Individualism and the Mental. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 4: 73–121. |
Burge I T. Burge Origins of Objectivity Oxford 2010 Burge II Tyler Burge "Two Kinds of Consciousness" In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 |
| Functionalism | Avramides | I 146 Functionalism/Avramidis: functionalism allows to refer to behavior with propositional attitudes, not on linguistic behavior. - It allows a subjective image of the mind. >Propositional attitudes, >Behavior, >Understanding, >Language behavior. I 147 Problem: this requires an indefinite number of further propositional attitudes. I 149 Functionalism/Lewis: we take mental concepts as theoretical terms (TT) and define our mental-theoretical terms by reference to the platitudes (commonplaces) of folk psychology. >Theoretical terms, >Folk psychology, >Everyday language, >Observation. These shall contain both, theoretical terms and the rest. - Then we transform every theoretical term into a name, replace the names with free variables. - then existential closure (of the open formulas ((s) Ramsey sentence). >Ramsey sentence, >Open formula. With that we achieve the original theory with the claim that it has a single implementation. - Then the theory has input/output concepts, but no specifically mental terminology. >Input/output. Problem/Avramides: how do we characterize input and output? BlockVsFunctionalism: either characterizes them chauvinistically or liberally. ((s) Because a purely physical characterization of the inputs and outputs would include or exclude the wrong ones.) >Philosophical chauvinism. I 153f AvramidesVsFunctionalism: if he is set to non-mentalistic characterization of the inputs and outputs, then he has to say what distinguishes mental from non-mental systems that have the same functional organization. Avramides: we always start with mentalistically characterized behavior. - Even with the marsians we say that his behavior must have an interpretation. So if normal evidence (Ned Block: not only linguistic, but mainly linguistic behavior) is part of our theory of propositional attitudes, we are committed to a symmetry between the semantic and the psychological. >Language behavior, >Ned Block. |
Avr I A. Avramides Meaning and Mind Boston 1989 |
| Functionalism | Chalmers | I 15 Functionalism/Lewis/Armstrong/Chalmers: Lewis and Armstrong tried to explain all mental concepts, not only some. >D. Lewis, >D. Armstrong. ChalmersVsLewis/ChalmersVsArmstrong: both authors made the same mistake like Descartes in assimilating the psychological to the phenomenal. >ChalmersVsDescartes, >R. Descartes, >Consciousness, >Consciousness/Chalmers, >Experience, >Knowing how. E.g. When we wonder whether somebody is having a colour experience, we are not wondering whether they are receiving environmental stimulation and processing it in a certain way. It is a conceptually coherent possibility that something could be playing the causal role without there being an associated experience. >Stimuli, >Qualia, >Colors, >Color Words, >Causal Role, >Experience. I 15 Functionalism/Consciousness/ChalmersVsFunctionalism/ChalmersVsArmstrong/ChalmersVsLewis/Chalmers: There is no mystery about whether any state plays a causal role, at most there are a few technical explanatory problems. Why there is a phenomenological quality of consciousness involved is a completely different question. >Introspection. Functionalism/Chalmers: he denies that there are two different questions. ((s) Also: ChalmersVsDennett). I 231 Functionalism/Consciousness/Chalmers: two variants: Functionalism of the 2nd level: Among these, Rosenthal's approach of thoughts of the second level about conscious experiences and Lycan's (1995) (1) approach about perceptions of the second level. These theories give good explanations for introspection. Functionalism of the 1st level : thesis: only cognitive states of the 1st level are used. Such theories are better in the explanation of conscious experiences. Since, however, not all cognitive states correspond to conscious experiences, one still needs a distinguishing feature for them. Solution/Chalmers: my criterion for this is the accessibility to global control. I 232 Kirk: (1994) (2): Thesis: "directly active" information is what is needed. Dretske: (1995) (3): Thesis: Experience is information that is represented for a system. Tye: (1995) (4): Thesis: Information must be "balanced" for purposes of cognitive processing. >Information. I 250 Functionalism/VsFunctionalism/Chalmers: the authors who argue with inverted Qualia or lacking Qualia present the logical possibility of counter-arguments. This is sufficient in the case of a strong functionalism. The invariance principle (from which it follows that conscious experiences are possible in a system with identical biochemical organization) is a weaker functionalism. Here the merely logical possibility of counter examples is not sufficient to refute. Instead, we need a natural possibility of missing or inverted qualia. >Qualia/Chalmers, >Exchanged spectra. Solution: to consider natural possibility, we will accept fading or "dancing" Qualia. I 275 Functionalism/Chalmers: the arguments in relation to a lacking, inverted and dancing Qualia do not support a strong, but the non-reductive functionalism I represent. Thesis: functional organization is, with natural necessity, sufficient for conscious experiences. This is a strong conclusion that strengthens the chances for > artificial intelligence. See also Strong Artificial Intelligence/Chalmers, >Artificial Consciousness, cf. >Strong Artificial Intelligence. 1. W. G. Lycan, A limited defense of phenomenal information. In: T. Metzingwr (ed), Conscious Experience, Paderborn 1995. 2. R. Kirk, Raw Feeling: A Philosophical Account of the Essence of Consciousness. Oxford 1994. 3. F. Dretske, Naturalizing the Mind, Cambridge 1995 4. M. Tye, Ten Problems of Consciousness, Cambridge 1995. |
Cha I D. Chalmers The Conscious Mind Oxford New York 1996 Cha II D. Chalmers Constructing the World Oxford 2014 |
| Functionalism | Fodor | Dennett I 292 ff Fodor/Dennett: the necessity of an organism to work smoothly at any stage imposes iron restrictions on its subsequent properties. --- Fodor IV 127 Functionalist: the causal role distinguishes desires and beliefs ((s) internal in the mind). SemanticsVsFunctionalism: the relationship between mind/world is determining. >World/Thinking, >Causal roles. IV 127 Semantic properties/Fodor/Lepore: functionalism: the semantic properties are derived from the functional (causal) role. So beliefs and desires are distinguished by the causal role. On the other hand: semantics: the semantic properties are derived from the relation of mind/world. --- Frank I 61 ~ FodorVsFunctionalism: functionalism does not grasp the qualia, nothing would be a token of the general type of pain, even if it were linked typically with all other psychological states. Argument of the missing qualia: the organism could behave without them jsut the same. Shoemaker: failure of qualia is unthinkable because of networking. >Qualia, >Qualia/Chalmers. |
F/L Jerry Fodor Ernest Lepore Holism. A Shoppers Guide Cambridge USA Oxford UK 1992 Fodor I Jerry Fodor "Special Sciences (or The Disunity of Science as a Working Hypothesis", Synthese 28 (1974), 97-115 In Kognitionswissenschaft, Dieter Münch Frankfurt/M. 1992 Fodor II Jerry Fodor Jerrold J. Katz Sprachphilosophie und Sprachwissenschaft In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Fodor III Jerry Fodor Jerrold J. Katz The availability of what we say in: Philosophical review, LXXII, 1963, pp.55-71 In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Dennett I D. Dennett Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, New York 1995 German Edition: Darwins gefährliches Erbe Hamburg 1997 Dennett II D. Dennett Kinds of Minds, New York 1996 German Edition: Spielarten des Geistes Gütersloh 1999 Dennett III Daniel Dennett "COG: Steps towards consciousness in robots" In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 Dennett IV Daniel Dennett "Animal Consciousness. What Matters and Why?", in: D. C. Dennett, Brainchildren. Essays on Designing Minds, Cambridge/MA 1998, pp. 337-350 In Der Geist der Tiere, D Perler/M. Wild Frankfurt/M. 2005 Fra I M. Frank (Hrsg.) Analytische Theorien des Selbstbewusstseins Frankfurt 1994 |
| Functionalism | Lewis | I 57f Putnam’s functionalism is another (earlier) than that of Lewis. It is directed against the computer model of the mind. It believes in the idea of a "program of the mind" which might be realized materially somewhere else already, e.g. in the totality of a rail system with freight transport. I 58 Lewis: his functionalism has nothing to do with that. But according to him, it might well be that machines cannot have a mind a priori. IV XI Functionalism/Lewis: I don't know if I am a functionalist: I reject at least two main theses: 1 Vs the thesis that someone only feels pain when he is in a state that the role of pain occupies for him. Lewis: It should depend on what role this state also plays in other individuals of its kind. >Causal role/Lewis. 2 Vs the thesis that "pain" is a rigid desigator for what all share who feel pain. Rather, the word non-rigidly denotes the state that the role of pain plays in various given ways. Certainly there is a state, because all those who feel pain have in common, namely "to have pain" But that is not the pain itself. And it is not the role of pain either! It is a "diagonal sense". >Pain/Lewis. Schwarz I 146 Analytical functionalism/terminology/Schwarz: this is how Lewis's position is sometimes called because of its holistic characterization. (Block, 1978(1), 271ff). >Holism, >Analytical/synthetical. I 148 "analytical": because the characterization of causal roles in Lewis is supposed to be analytical. But if functionalism is to be understood as a theory of Vs identity, then Lewis is not a functionalist, but an identity theorist. Standard objections VsFunctionalism do not affect Lewis at all: Bsp mental states: Mental states/Lewis: for their characterization it also needs a substantial connection to the perceived environment, etc. Therefore there is no danger that we have to ascribe feelings to the Chinese economy. >Mental states. 1. Ned Block [1978]: “Troubles with Functionalism”. In C.W. Savage (Hg.) Perception and Cognition: Issues in the Foundations of Psychology, Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press |
Lewis I David K. Lewis Die Identität von Körper und Geist Frankfurt 1989 Lewis I (a) David K. Lewis An Argument for the Identity Theory, in: Journal of Philosophy 63 (1966) In Die Identität von Körper und Geist, Frankfurt/M. 1989 Lewis I (b) David K. Lewis Psychophysical and Theoretical Identifications, in: Australasian Journal of Philosophy 50 (1972) In Die Identität von Körper und Geist, Frankfurt/M. 1989 Lewis I (c) David K. Lewis Mad Pain and Martian Pain, Readings in Philosophy of Psychology, Vol. 1, Ned Block (ed.) Harvard University Press, 1980 In Die Identität von Körper und Geist, Frankfurt/M. 1989 Lewis II David K. Lewis "Languages and Language", in: K. Gunderson (Ed.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. VII, Language, Mind, and Knowledge, Minneapolis 1975, pp. 3-35 In Handlung, Kommunikation, Bedeutung, Georg Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1979 Lewis IV David K. Lewis Philosophical Papers Bd I New York Oxford 1983 Lewis V David K. Lewis Philosophical Papers Bd II New York Oxford 1986 Lewis VI David K. Lewis Convention. A Philosophical Study, Cambridge/MA 1969 German Edition: Konventionen Berlin 1975 LewisCl Clarence Irving Lewis Collected Papers of Clarence Irving Lewis Stanford 1970 LewisCl I Clarence Irving Lewis Mind and the World Order: Outline of a Theory of Knowledge (Dover Books on Western Philosophy) 1991 Schw I W. Schwarz David Lewis Bielefeld 2005 |
| Functionalism | Searle | Dennett I 557 Function/Searle (according to Dennett): only products that were produced by a real human consciousness, have a function (> objet ambigu, P. Valéry). DennettVsSearle: therefore the wings of the aircraft serve to fly, but not the wings of the eagle. Searle I 19 SearleVsFunctionalism (SearleVsPutnam): relationships between mind states are not only causal. Otherwise stones would have the same mind states like us with the right causal relations. Cf. >Functions. I 59 ff VsFunctionalism: functionalism eliminates qualia - imitation of a functional organization does not result in pain sensation. >Qualia, >Simulation. I 233f A machine is defined by effects and cannot be recreated from cheese. A computer is syntactically defined and can be rebuild by anything (cats, mice, cheese). Syntax is always relative to the observer but not intrinsical. However, the heart is an intrinsical pump. Also, water can be described as intelligent (lowest resistance). I 266f Intentional phenomena: rule consequences: are genuine causal phenomena. Functional explanations: are only bare physical facts. Causality only exists through interest-oriented description here. >Description dependence. Rules are no cause for action. >Rules. I 266 Function/Searle: a function has no separate layer. >Description level, >Levels(Order). I 269 Pattern: a pattern plays a causal role in functional terms, but does not guarantee unconscious representation. (Intentionality) >Causality/Searle. III 24 SearleVsMillikan: a function is always relative to the observer (only "flow" immanent). Millikan: the function arose evolutionary. >Ruth Millikan. |
Searle I John R. Searle The Rediscovery of the Mind, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1992 German Edition: Die Wiederentdeckung des Geistes Frankfurt 1996 Searle II John R. Searle Intentionality. An essay in the philosophy of mind, Cambridge/MA 1983 German Edition: Intentionalität Frankfurt 1991 Searle III John R. Searle The Construction of Social Reality, New York 1995 German Edition: Die Konstruktion der gesellschaftlichen Wirklichkeit Hamburg 1997 Searle IV John R. Searle Expression and Meaning. Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts, Cambridge/MA 1979 German Edition: Ausdruck und Bedeutung Frankfurt 1982 Searle V John R. Searle Speech Acts, Cambridge/MA 1969 German Edition: Sprechakte Frankfurt 1983 Searle VII John R. Searle Behauptungen und Abweichungen In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Searle VIII John R. Searle Chomskys Revolution in der Linguistik In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Searle IX John R. Searle "Animal Minds", in: Midwest Studies in Philosophy 19 (1994) pp. 206-219 In Der Geist der Tiere, D Perler/M. Wild Frankfurt/M. 2005 Dennett I D. Dennett Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, New York 1995 German Edition: Darwins gefährliches Erbe Hamburg 1997 Dennett II D. Dennett Kinds of Minds, New York 1996 German Edition: Spielarten des Geistes Gütersloh 1999 Dennett III Daniel Dennett "COG: Steps towards consciousness in robots" In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 Dennett IV Daniel Dennett "Animal Consciousness. What Matters and Why?", in: D. C. Dennett, Brainchildren. Essays on Designing Minds, Cambridge/MA 1998, pp. 337-350 In Der Geist der Tiere, D Perler/M. Wild Frankfurt/M. 2005 |
| Information | Dennett | I 268 Information/code/Dennett: the fact that a one-dimensional code can represent a three-dimensional structure is a gain of information. Actually, "value" is added! (Contribution to the functioning). >Functions, >Functional explanation, >Code. II 35 Information/action/virus/Dennett: The virus must "make sure" of the proliferation of its information. in order to achieve its objectives, it produces an enzyme which is shown a "password", and then it leaves the other molecules "untouched". II 94f Information/Life/Dennett: long before there were nervous systems in organisms, they used a primitive. postal service: the circulation and metabolism for transmitting information. Information processing/DennettVsFunctionalism: one thing was always clear: as soon as there are transducers and effectors in an information system, its "media neutrality" or multiple realization disappears. (VsPutnam, VsTuring). Embodied Information/Dennett: evolution causes information to become physical in every part of every living creature. E.g. the baleen of the whale embodies information about the food. E.g. The bird's wings contain information about the medium air. E.g. The skin of the chameleon carries information about the environment. This information need not go to the brain as copies. |
Dennett I D. Dennett Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, New York 1995 German Edition: Darwins gefährliches Erbe Hamburg 1997 Dennett II D. Dennett Kinds of Minds, New York 1996 German Edition: Spielarten des Geistes Gütersloh 1999 Dennett III Daniel Dennett "COG: Steps towards consciousness in robots" In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 Dennett IV Daniel Dennett "Animal Consciousness. What Matters and Why?", in: D. C. Dennett, Brainchildren. Essays on Designing Minds, Cambridge/MA 1998, pp. 337-350 In Der Geist der Tiere, D Perler/M. Wild Frankfurt/M. 2005 |
| Inverted Spectra | Churchland | Fodor IV 195 Qualia/Quality/Sensation/inverted spectra/Fodor/Lepore: it is conceptually possible that while you see something red, I see something green. If the change is systematic, there is nothing in the behavior that could reveal it. VsBehaviorism/VsFunctionalism: the inverted spectra appear to show that behaviorism is false. And also the functionalism. (Block/Fodor, Shoemaker). One might think that a theory of qualitative content could solve the problem. But it is precisely the qualitative content that has been interchanged. And precisely the concept of the sensitive identity becomes ambiguous. VsChurchland: his approach does not help at all. The inscriptions of the points of the dice could also be inverted. ((s) One could always describe it, but one would not know which sensations are present in the other.) --- IV 195/196 Even though this frequency combination represents this particular pink, it is conceptually possible that something has the first property, but not the second. Inverted spectra/Qualia: Problem: there seems to be no property of a sensation except its qualitative content on which the qualitative content supervenes. In particular, there appears to be no proportioned or neurophysiological property on which supervenience is guaranteed. Inverted spectra/tradition: would say that Churchland's dimensions in the Qualia color dice represent by reference to properties that they do not necessarily possess. Or, if you think that it is "metaphysically necessary" that color sensations have the psychophysical properties that they have, then one would have to say that this necessity is not brought about by any necessity between sensual concepts and psychophysical concepts. One might well know that a sensation corresponds to a point in the color dice and still does not know how it is. The dimensions do not determine the content. Why not place a semantic space next to it, add the condition that the dimensions of the semantic space must be semantic? They would have to name content states through their content. E.g. Perhaps then one could identify uncle, aunt, president, Cleopatra etc. along these dimensions? --- IV 197 E.g. Cleopatra, as a politician, is closer to the president than to marriageability. Fodor/LeporeVsChurchland: that is what we are really interested in: a robust theory of the equality of content instead of identity of content that has been lost with the analytic/synthetic distinction. Problem: Equality presupposes identity and a corresponding theory. |
Churla I Paul M. Churchland Matter and Consciousness Cambridge 2013 Churli I Patricia S. Churchland Touching a Nerve: Our Brains, Our Brains New York 2014 Churli II Patricia S. Churchland "Can Neurobiology Teach Us Anything about Consciousness?" in: The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates ed. Block, Flanagan, Güzeldere pp. 127-140 In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 F/L Jerry Fodor Ernest Lepore Holism. A Shoppers Guide Cambridge USA Oxford UK 1992 Fodor I Jerry Fodor "Special Sciences (or The Disunity of Science as a Working Hypothesis", Synthese 28 (1974), 97-115 In Kognitionswissenschaft, Dieter Münch Frankfurt/M. 1992 Fodor II Jerry Fodor Jerrold J. Katz Sprachphilosophie und Sprachwissenschaft In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Fodor III Jerry Fodor Jerrold J. Katz The availability of what we say in: Philosophical review, LXXII, 1963, pp.55-71 In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 |
| |||
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author Vs Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Behaviorism | Fodor Vs Behaviorism | Danto I 268 Rotary FiguresVsBehaviorism > Mental Representation (inner r) VsIntrospection (ChomskyVsBehaviorism), FodorVsBehaviorism. Fodor/Lepore IV 56 VsBehaviorism/Fodor/Lepore: E.g. assuming "dog" and "shmog" are two words with which speakers react to exactly the same stimuli, namely dogs. Then for e.g. Skinner would follow that "dog" and "shmog" are synonymous. Then, the following sentence would be analytical in the language of the speaker: "Whatever is a dog, is a shmog." QuineVs: there are neither synonyms nor analytic sentences! IV 57 So Skinner’s semantics must be wrong. VsVs: it is namely a priori! Even worse: all the semantics must be wrong, a priori, because this nihilistic theory will say that there are no semantic properties at all. Fodor/Lepore: what went wrong this time? We have taken literally, that Quine has not shown in Two Dogmas (TD) (and also has not argued) that there are no semantic facts and no analytic truths. Meaning/Fodor/Lepore: what we rather concede is that if meaning is to have any sense at all, then it cannot be reconstructed by reference to the sentences to which the speaker agrees. Meaning/Two Dogmas/TD/Quine: meaning cannot be reduced to the inferences to which one is willing to agree. Reason: what inferences you agree to only depends on how you see the world, i.e. what you intend your words to mean. ((s)> interest, intention, meaning). Important argument: it is impossible to detect which of his/her views the speaker accepts a priori! So there are no analytic sentences. IV 195 Qualia/quality/sensation/exchanged spectra/Fodor/Lepore: it is conceptually possible that while you see something red, I see something green. If the exchange is systematic, there is nothing in the behavior that could uncover it. VsBehaviorism/VsFunctionalism: the reversed spectra thus seem to indicate that behaviorism is wrong (and also functionalism: Block/Fodor, Shoemaker). You might think that a theory of qualitative content could solve the problem. But it is precisely the qualitative content that has been exchanged. And it is precisely the concept of the perceptual identity that becomes ambiguous because of that. VsChurchland: his approach does not help at all. The labels of the dots on the dice could be exactly reversed. ((s) You could always describe them without knowing what feelings are present in the other.) |
F/L Jerry Fodor Ernest Lepore Holism. A Shoppers Guide Cambridge USA Oxford UK 1992 Fodor I Jerry Fodor "Special Sciences (or The Disunity of Science as a Working Hypothesis", Synthese 28 (1974), 97-115 In Kognitionswissenschaft, Dieter Münch Frankfurt/M. 1992 Fodor II Jerry Fodor Jerrold J. Katz Sprachphilosophie und Sprachwissenschaft In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Fodor III Jerry Fodor Jerrold J. Katz The availability of what we say in: Philosophical review, LXXII, 1963, pp.55-71 In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Danto I A. C. Danto Connections to the World - The Basic Concepts of Philosophy, New York 1989 German Edition: Wege zur Welt München 1999 Danto III Arthur C. Danto Nietzsche as Philosopher: An Original Study, New York 1965 German Edition: Nietzsche als Philosoph München 1998 Danto VII A. C. Danto The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art (Columbia Classics in Philosophy) New York 2005 |
| Behaviorism | Functionalism Vs Behaviorism | Block I 161 FunctionalismVsBehaviorism: replaces the "sensory input" by "sensory inputs and mental states." Furthermore, the "action dispositions" of behaviorism by "Dispositions to act and presence of certain mental states." Functionalism = behaviorism plus mental states. Avra I 147 Def Functionalism/Avramides: every type of mind state is a state consisting of a disposition to act in certain ways and to have certain mind states ((s) tokens) if certain sensory outputs (?) and certain mind states are given. (?) (39). FunctionalismVsBehaviorism: does not deny that mind states can be a real part of causal explanations. It tries to explain what mind states are at all. If they are dispositions at all, then in a very broad sense (Ryle: "multi-traced dispositions"). VsFunctionalism: does not solve all the problems of behaviorism: because every attribution of propositional attitudes requires an indefinite number of other attributions of propositional attitudes (e.g., according to the different possibilities to make wishes come true). We cannot attribute a mind state without attributing other mind states. I 148 Holism/Avramides: therefore it is sometimes said that behaviorism is not able to find access to the holism of the mental. Solution: functionalism: was specially designed to take account of this holism. Frank I 130 FunctionalismVsBehaviorism: here it is recognized that the internal states of the system must play an important role. But they do not need to be physiologically explored! It is sufficient to characterize them abstractly (functionally). Therefore, also the primacy of behavioral observation is understandable. Thomas Nagel (1974): What Is It Like to Be a Bat?, in: The Philosophical Review 83 (1974), 435-450 |
Block I N. Block Consciousness, Function, and Representation: Collected Papers, Volume 1 (Bradford Books) Cambridge 2007 Block II Ned Block "On a confusion about a function of consciousness" In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 Fra I M. Frank (Hrsg.) Analytische Theorien des Selbstbewusstseins Frankfurt 1994 |
| Block, Ned | Shoemaker Vs Block, Ned | Block I 188 Block: And if there are no homunculi, they cannot be identical with a qualitative structure. ShoemakerVsBlock: asserts that the Def "argument of the missing qualia" is logically impossible. That means it is logically impossible that two systems are in the same functional state but one has a qualitative state, the other, however, does not! (I 218) (BlockVs). ShoemakerVsBlock: the problems with brains in the tank can be avoided if we introduce the concept of a "paradigm embodied person". Thus, a functioning sensory apparatus and a will control over movement is assumed. Then you can extend it to the functional character of non-paradigmatic: a physical structure that is not part of a paradigm embodied person, then passes as a realization of mental states, if it can be included without changing its internal structure and the types of relations between their states into a larger physical system, namely the body of the embodied paradigmatic person. Frank I 61 FodorVsFunctionalism/BlockVsFunctionalis/Frank: the so combined F. does not capture the Qualia, that is the actual mental states. E.g. inverted spectra: functionalism then no longer explains this consciousness experiences. ((s) For him, the inverted spectrum would be identical to the non-exchange?). Fodor/Block: nothing would be a token of the general type of state of pain, even if it was linked to all other mental states at all typical ways for pain. Fra I 62 "absent qualia argument"/argument of the missing qualia/Block/Fodor: even more fatal: the organism could behave exactly like that without qualia. ShoemakerVsBlock: defends the compatibility of the concession of qualia with functionalism. Qualia are intuitive for the consciousness, given without a transmission of a perception and their becoming a feeling is a completely adequate identification of their existence. |
Shoemaker I S. Shoemaker Identity, Cause, and Mind: Philosophical Essays Expanded Edition 2003 Block I N. Block Consciousness, Function, and Representation: Collected Papers, Volume 1 (Bradford Books) Cambridge 2007 Block II Ned Block "On a confusion about a function of consciousness" In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 Fra I M. Frank (Hrsg.) Analytische Theorien des Selbstbewusstseins Frankfurt 1994 |
| Churchland, P. | Fodor Vs Churchland, P. | IV 189 Mind/brain/Churchland: thesis: the brain represents different aspects of reality through a position in an appropriate state space. IV 191 FodorVsChurchland/LeporeVsChuchland: Churchland also seems to be guilty of the illusion, that there could ultimately be something empirical, so that conceptual relations could in the end be reduced to relations between observation concepts. Churchland: semantic identity goes back to the special place in the network of semantically relevant sentences (and that is of the whole language). Translation: therefore, we can speak of the equality of sentences across languages! IV 192 Equivalent expressions occupy the same (corresponding) places in the corresponding network of the other language. Nevertheless, translation should always take observability into account. IV 193 Churchland/Fodor/Lepore: Churchland surprisingly begins with feelings, not with intentionality (e.g. with propositional attitudes or concepts). Thesis: if we had adequate access to feelings, it could be generalized to a general mental representation. Churchland: the qualitative nature of our sensations is generally considered as inaccessible for the neurobiological reduction. But even so, we find that a determined attempt to find an order here revealed a sizable chunk of expressible information, e.g. color cubes with frequencies. IV 194 Fodor/Lepore: Churchland actually assumes that this is an access to the sensations (through frequencies!), not only to the discrimination ability of the nervous system. Churchland: thus, the inexpressible can be expressed! The "unspeakable rose" can be grasped by indication of the frequency. This is perhaps a way to replace everyday language. IV 195 Fodor/LeporeVsChurchland: how plausible is this story in terms of sensations? Does it provide a robust notion of equality in general? Qualia/quality/sensation/exchanged spectra/Fodor/Lepore: it is conceptually possible that while you see something red, I see something green. If the exchange is systematic, there is nothing in the behavior that could uncover it. VsBehaviorism/VsFunctionalism: the exchanged spectra thus seem to indicate that behaviorism is wrong and functionalism, too (Block/Fodor, Shoemaker). One might think that a theory of qualitative content could solve the problem. But it is precisely the qualitative content that has been exchanged. And it is precisely the concept of the perceptual identity that becomes ambiguous because of that. VsChurchland: Churchland's approach does not help at all. The labels of the dots on the dice could be exactly reversed. IV 196 Why should a semantic space not be put beside it and the condition added that the dimensions of the semantic space must be semantic? They must designate content states through their contents. E.g. Perhaps we could then identify uncle, aunt, President, Cleopatra, etc. along these dimensions? IV 197 E.g. Cleopatra as a politician is closer to the president in terms of marriageability. Fodor/LeporeVsChurchland: that is what we are really interested in: a robust theory of the equality of content rather than identity of content that has been lost with the analytic/synthetic distinction. Problem: equality presupposes identity and a corresponding theory. >State semantics: deals with the question of how the identity of the state spaces is fixed. IV 200 Representation/neurophysiological/mind/brain/Fodor/LeporeVsChurchland: colors are not represented as frequencies. IV 201 Fodor/LeporeVsChurchland: two different interpretations of his diagrams would also interpret neighborhoods very differently. --- Metzinger II 466 "Eliminative Materialism"/Churchland: eliminative materialism means two things: 1) Materialism is most probably true. 2) Many traditional explanations of human behavior are not suitable for understanding the real causes. II 467 "Request"/"conviction"/Churchland: Paul and Patricia Churchland: we will probably have to drop these "categories" (FodorVsChurchland, SearleVsChurchland). |
Fodor III Jerry Fodor Jerrold J. Katz The availability of what we say in: Philosophical review, LXXII, 1963, pp.55-71 In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Fodor IV Jerry Fodor Ernest Lepore Holism. A Shoppers Guide Oxford GB/Cambridge USA 1992 Metz I Th. Metzinger (Hrsg.) Bewusstsein Paderborn 1996 |
| Frege, G. | Newen Vs Frege, G. | I 209 Physicalism/Identity Theory/New: because of the possibility that mental phenomena could be realized in different ways (functionalism) token physicalism was abandoned in favor of type physicalism. (VsToken Physicalism) Functionalism/Newen: Problem: we do not know what the possibly physical states have in common ((s) on a mental level). Mental Universals/Newen: are needed then. Bieri: Problem: either a theory about mental universals seems empirically implausible. Or it is empirically plausible, then it does not tell us what we want to know. (Bieri: Anal. Ph. d. Geistes, p. 41). Functional State/Newen: similar to dispositions in that it can be characterized by hypothetical relations between initial situations and consequent states. I 211 VsFunctionalism/Newen: qualia problem FunctionalismVsVs: zombie argument: I 212 There need be no qualia to explain behavior. Mental Causation/Newen: is still an open question. NS I 90 Descriptions/Theory/Russell/Newen/Schrenk: the objective is to overcome two problems: 1) identity statements: need to be informative 2) negative existential statements or statements with empty descriptions must be sensible. Names/Personal Names/Russell: Thesis: names are nothing but abbreviations for decriptions. Theory of Descriptions/Russell: E.g. 1) There is at least one author of "Waverley" (existence assertion). 2) There is not more than one author of "Waverley" (uniqueness assertion) 3) Whoever wrote "Waverley", was a Scot (statement content). This is about three possible situations where the sentence may be wrong: a) nobody wrote Waverley, b) several persons did it, c) the author is not a Scot. NS I 91 Identity/Theory of Descriptions/Russell/Newen/Schrenk: Problem: if the identity of Cicero with Tullius is necessary (as self-identity), how can the corresponding sentence be informative then? Solution/Russell: 1) There is at least one Roman consul who denounced Catiline 2) There is not more than one Roman consul who denounced Catiline 1*) There is at least one author of "De Oratore" 2*) There is not more than one author of "De Oratore" 3) whoever denounced Catiline is identical with the author of "De Oratore". Empty Names/Empty Descriptions/Russell/Newen/Schrenk: Solution: 1) There is at least one present king of France 2) There is not more than one present king of France 3) Whoever is the present King of France is bald. Thus the sentence makes sense, even though the first part of the statement is incorrect. Negative Existential Statements/Theory of Descriptions/Russell/Newen/Schrenk: Problem: assigning a sensible content. It is not the case that 1) there is at least one flying horse 2) not more than one flying horse. Thus, the negative existence statement "The flying horse does not exist" makes sense and is true. RussellVsFrege/RussellvsFregean Sense/Newen/Schrenk: this is to avoid that "sense" (the content) must be assumed as an abstract entity. Truth-Value Gaps/RussellVsFrege: they, too, are thus avoided. Point: sentences that seemed to be about a subject, however, now become general propositions about the world. |
New II Albert Newen Analytische Philosophie zur Einführung Hamburg 2005 Newen I Albert Newen Markus Schrenk Einführung in die Sprachphilosophie Darmstadt 2008 |
| Functionalism | Block Vs Functionalism | I 161 Functionalism: wants to individuate mental states causally. Problem: there are then organisms that have mental states according to behaviorism, (liberal view) but not according to functionalism (chauvinistic view). I 210 BlockVsFunctionalism: it is difficult to see how there can be a single characterization of the inputs and outputs that applies to all and only mental systems. |
Block I N. Block Consciousness, Function, and Representation: Collected Papers, Volume 1 (Bradford Books) Cambridge 2007 Block II Ned Block "On a confusion about a function of consciousness" In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 |
| Functionalism | Dennett Vs Functionalism | II 87 Functionalism/Dennett: widely spread in everyday life. Basic idea: E.g. "noble is who does nobly", "Not what it is made of makes a mind (or a belief, a pain, a fear), but what it can do." In common linguistic use of functionalism, such entities defined by their function allow multiple realizations. Why can an artificial mind not be made like an artificial heart with almost any material? II 88 DennettVsFunctionalism: he deliberately abstracts from the inscrutable details of performance and focuses on the work that is actually done. But he simplifies too much. II 95 Information Processing/DennettVsFunctionalism: one thing was always clear: as soon as there are transducers and effectors in an information system, its "media neutrality" or multiple realization disappears. (VsPutnam, VsTuring). E.g. To receive light something light-sensitive is needed. E.g. Controls for ships or factories are media-neutral, as long as they fulfill their task in the time available. But to the nervous system applies that much less time is available. The realization of the nervous system is not a media-neutral. And that is not because it would need to have a certain aura of a particular material or of living being, but because it originated in evolution as the central control system of living beings who’ve been abundantly equipped with very decentralized control systems. The new systems had to be set up above them, but in very close collaboration with them. There was an astronomical number of conversion points. |
Dennett I D. Dennett Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, New York 1995 German Edition: Darwins gefährliches Erbe Hamburg 1997 Dennett II D. Dennett Kinds of Minds, New York 1996 German Edition: Spielarten des Geistes Gütersloh 1999 Dennett III Daniel Dennett "COG: Steps towards consciousness in robots" In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 Dennett IV Daniel Dennett "Animal Consciousness. What Matters and Why?", in: D. C. Dennett, Brainchildren. Essays on Designing Minds, Cambridge/MA 1998, pp. 337-350 In Der Geist der Tiere, D Perler/M. Wild Frankfurt/M. 2005 |
| Functionalism | Field Vs Functionalism | II 43 Belief/Functionalism/Stalnaker/Lewis/Field: the thesis that belief is a functional state. (Regardless of the physical realization). Important argument: this involves no relation to a sentence or sentence analogue in a system of internal representations. II 44 Stalnaker: E.g. beings from other planets: ...Here we look at sensory inputs and assume that they are correlated with their survival. ...Then we manipulate the environment. Belief/Martians/Stalnaker: then we would not only attribute analogues of beliefs and desires, but them themselves. But we do not need to assume any language, not even Mentalese. (Stalnaker 1976, p. 82). Representation/FieldVsStalnaker: that does not allow us to distinguish whether such a functional theory of belief requires a system of internal representations. 1) We have not observed the entire behavior. 2) Even if: an assertion about behavior is not simply an assertion about behavior, it is an assertion about how the behavior is caused. FieldVsStalnaker: we need knowledge (or reasonable belief) about how behavior is produced in order to know (or believe) that a being has belief. Functionalism/Inner State/Field: an assertion about internal states of an organism is an assertion about those and not reducible to behavior. II 49 Functional Relation/Field: the functional relation psi is not itself a physical relation. FieldVsFunctionalism: Problem: even if we consider belief to be a functional relation, it does not solve Brentano’s problem, because here we would have to show that there could be physical relations between people and propositions. The only thing functionalism says is trivial: that my relation to propositions may differ from that of dogs or of myself 20 years ago. II 50 Def Orthographic Coincidence/Predicate/Single-Digit/Multi-Digit/Belief/Field: Thesis: all the various attributions E.g. "X believes Russell was bald", E.g. "X believes Russell was bald or snow is white", etc. should be regarded as primitive single-digit predicates. Then we could drop all two-digit predicates like E.g. "X believes that p" entirely. Orthographic coincidence: then the fact that the expression "believes that" occurs in both (supposedly) single-digit predicates would be without meaning, a mere orthographic coincidence. Likewise, the fact that both contain "Russell was bald". FieldVs: that cannot be taken seriously. But suppose it was serious, what would follow? FieldVsOrthographic coincidence: it would follow that there does not have to be a physical relationship between people and propositions. Because since we did not speak of a psychological relation, it is clear that there is no realization in which a physical relation would be needed. ((s) then there must be an infinite number of single-digit predicates that reflect the most complicated attitudes.) Field: although the error is so crude, it occurred to me myself (in the first paragraph of this section) when I tried to explain that functionalism makes representations superfluous: I said: "A state of an organism is a state of belief that p, if this state plays the right (appropriate) role in the psychology of the organism." II 51 Vs: in order for this to make sense the letter "p" must be understood here as an abbreviation for a particular sentence, E.g. "Either Russell was bald or snow is white". Field: I’m not saying that it is meaningless. But "appropriate role" suggests that we can define this particular state in a directly functional way. And that in turn suggests that the procedure that we need for "pain" could also be applied to "Russell was bald or snow is white". ((s) and that it is only an orthographic coincidence that we are not doing it). And that the corresponding simple expression represents a property. Solution: in order to avoid the "orthographic coincidence","X believes that p0" should not be considered as functionally definable for certain sentences p0, in such a way as that which is right for "X is in pain". ((s) as a function, no (too) specific sentence should be assumed, but something more general). Solution: It should be non-functionally defined from a relational predicate "X believes that p", which is functionally defined by (3). N.B.: then we need physical properties and quantities of possible worlds. |
Field I H. Field Realism, Mathematics and Modality Oxford New York 1989 Field II H. Field Truth and the Absence of Fact Oxford New York 2001 Field III H. Field Science without numbers Princeton New Jersey 1980 Field IV Hartry Field "Realism and Relativism", The Journal of Philosophy, 76 (1982), pp. 553-67 In Theories of Truth, Paul Horwich Aldershot 1994 |
| Functionalism | Fodor Vs Functionalism | Block I 162 Ironically, the physicalist excludes mindless creatures who still have a mind. FodorVsFunctionalism: but precisely this argument can also be used just as well against functionalism. If liberalism is avoided, chauvinism threatens. --- Fodor/Lepore IV 127 Functionalism/Fodor/Lepore: beliefs and wishes are both types of representations, but different in their causal (associative/computational) role ((s) within the mind). Semantics/VsFunctionalism/Fodor/Lepore: here, the semantic attributes are obtained from the relation mind/world and not from the functional (causal) role ((s) i.e. not within the mind). |
Fodor III Jerry Fodor Jerrold J. Katz The availability of what we say in: Philosophical review, LXXII, 1963, pp.55-71 In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Fodor IV Jerry Fodor Ernest Lepore Holism. A Shoppers Guide Oxford GB/Cambridge USA 1992 Block I N. Block Consciousness, Function, and Representation: Collected Papers, Volume 1 (Bradford Books) Cambridge 2007 Block II Ned Block "On a confusion about a function of consciousness" In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 |
| Functionalism | Lewis Vs Functionalism | IV 120 VsFunctionalism/Lewis: a broader established functionalist theory of the mind is criticized by both sides: a) it seems wrong to assume that it is necessary or inalterable that mental states take exactly the causal role they have at this moment. e.g. can there be no exception like in the case of the calculator that does not work? b) on the other hand, Karl's mental states seem to be intrinsic in him. Why should the feelings he currently experiences - pain or stupidity- lead to other feelings in other humans? ((s) Meaning resulting from publicly shared language?) Lewis: I see no other way than to equally represent those two intuitions at the same time. Individualist functionalism: represents the second theory at the expense of the first one. Lewis: I have tried to use a compromise. As such, every theory is respected a bit. a) it is indeed possible that extraordinary states do not fully take up their definite causal role IV 121 b) mental states of somebody are the intrinsic states in which he/she is. Yet what makes them the states is not entirely intrinsic.To a certain extent it is related to the other representatives of his nature. But this extent is limited since most cases are not extraordinary. |
Lewis I David K. Lewis Die Identität von Körper und Geist Frankfurt 1989 Lewis I (a) David K. Lewis An Argument for the Identity Theory, in: Journal of Philosophy 63 (1966) In Die Identität von Körper und Geist, Frankfurt/M. 1989 Lewis I (b) David K. Lewis Psychophysical and Theoretical Identifications, in: Australasian Journal of Philosophy 50 (1972) In Die Identität von Körper und Geist, Frankfurt/M. 1989 Lewis I (c) David K. Lewis Mad Pain and Martian Pain, Readings in Philosophy of Psychology, Vol. 1, Ned Block (ed.) Harvard University Press, 1980 In Die Identität von Körper und Geist, Frankfurt/M. 1989 Lewis II David K. Lewis "Languages and Language", in: K. Gunderson (Ed.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. VII, Language, Mind, and Knowledge, Minneapolis 1975, pp. 3-35 In Handlung, Kommunikation, Bedeutung, Georg Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1979 Lewis IV David K. Lewis Philosophical Papers Bd I New York Oxford 1983 Lewis V David K. Lewis Philosophical Papers Bd II New York Oxford 1986 Lewis VI David K. Lewis Convention. A Philosophical Study, Cambridge/MA 1969 German Edition: Konventionen Berlin 1975 LewisCl Clarence Irving Lewis Collected Papers of Clarence Irving Lewis Stanford 1970 LewisCl I Clarence Irving Lewis Mind and the World Order: Outline of a Theory of Knowledge (Dover Books on Western Philosophy) 1991 |
| Functionalism | Luhmann Vs Functionalism | Baraldi I 61f Functional Analysis: allows to understand each phenomenon as contingent and comparable. Each phenomenon becomes a problem that opens up different possibilities of connection. Functional analysis describes the relationship between problems and their possible solution. VsFunctional Analysis: there is no differentiation between function and effect possible in an isolated system: e.g. heart could be a system for generating heart sounds, or a mechanism for information. It is an event that selects states of the system and it exerts selective influence on structures and triggers changes. The ability to process information presupposes the ability to orient oneself to distinctions. - > Communication/Luhmann. Environment has only function of irritation and disturbance of the system, it comes to information, if irritations are processed by own structures of the system. Information arises, if an unexpected event leads to change, what one will expect later. Communication does not transmit information, because nothing is transmitted, the communicator retains information, the understanding person does not get something, but processes his/her structures autonomously. |
AU I N. Luhmann Introduction to Systems Theory, Lectures Universität Bielefeld 1991/1992 German Edition: Einführung in die Systemtheorie Heidelberg 1992 Lu I N. Luhmann Die Kunst der Gesellschaft Frankfurt 1997 Baraldi I C. Baraldi, G.Corsi. E. Esposito GLU: Glossar zu Luhmanns Theorie sozialer Systeme Frankfurt 1997 |
| Functionalism | Nagel Vs Functionalism | Frank I 64 Subject/Body/Nagel: if I am familiar with my mental states necessaryly directly, i.e. not through perception, but it is only possible to address perception findings as mine through the direct familiarity, then I have a reason not to seek the subject of the psyche in the body. In addition, I am also in an arbitrary mental state when I have no idea about its descriptive interpretation. ((s) VsNagel: (with Sellars): access only through language). NagelVsFunctionalism: if he was right, it would necessarily be true of mental states that they would be identical with functional states, but only by chance, that they are mental states, because the latter depends on their causal roles, and not on their inner epistemic nature. Nagel III 21 NagelVsFunctionalism/VsReductionism: the ordinary concept of the mental already contains the beginnings of a very different conception of objective reality. We cannot understand the idea of a different consciousness if we interpret it in a way that becomes incomprehensible when we try to apply the idea to ourselves. |
NagE I E. Nagel The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation Cambridge, MA 1979 Nagel I Th. Nagel The Last Word, New York/Oxford 1997 German Edition: Das letzte Wort Stuttgart 1999 Nagel II Thomas Nagel What Does It All Mean? Oxford 1987 German Edition: Was bedeutet das alles? Stuttgart 1990 Nagel III Thomas Nagel The Limits of Objectivity. The Tanner Lecture on Human Values, in: The Tanner Lectures on Human Values 1980 Vol. I (ed) St. M. McMurrin, Salt Lake City 1980 German Edition: Die Grenzen der Objektivität Stuttgart 1991 NagelEr I Ernest Nagel Teleology Revisited and Other Essays in the Philosophy and History of Science New York 1982 Fra I M. Frank (Hrsg.) Analytische Theorien des Selbstbewusstseins Frankfurt 1994 |
| Functionalism | Putnam Vs Functionalism | V 112 Psychology/Putnam: psychological properties exhibit the same characteristic. Ex being angry: may be a property of the relatives of thousands of different species with possibly very different physical and chemical structure. V 111/112 Def functionalism: the view that the most plausible 'monistic' theory (that avoids the division of mind and matter as two separate types of substances) is the one that states that psychological properties and functional properties are identical. Putnam: functionalism already supplies the correct naturalistic description. There are other "mentalist" descriptions of this relationship which are also correct, but can not be traced back to the worldview that we call "nature"! The concepts "rationality", "truth" and "reference" belong to such a "mentalist" version. VsFunctionalism: the qualitative character of sensations proves difficult for this theory. Equating emotional states such as jealousy or anger with functional states of the overall system is plausible, but Ex the experience of a particular shade of blue is problematic if one wants to equate it with a function. V 112/113 Inverted spectra/Locke: how would one ever experience it? If someone sees something blue with inverted spectrum, then it looks red, but since childhood that person was taught him to call this color blue. So one would never know it. Putnam: Description: Ex just imagine that one's own spectrum is reversed at a certain time, but one remembers how it was before. The functional roles have reversed themselves. V 114 If we now adopt the "functionalist" theory of subjective colors "a sensation is exactly then a blue sensation, if it has the role to signal the presence of objective blue in the surroundings". This theory indeed detected a meaning of the expression "Blue sensation", but not its desired "qualitative" sense. If this functional role is identical to the qualitative character, one could not say that the quality of the sensation has changed. But the quality has changed. In this case, the quality does not seem to be a functional state. (VsFunktionalismus). V 155 Feyerabend/Putnam: (Against methodological constraints): the determinants of our conceptions of scientific rationality are largely what we would call irrational. He suggests that the modern scientific and technological rationality is a scam according to its own standards. (Similar tendency in Foucault). But Feyerabend goes far beyond Kuhn and Foucault. He claims that quacks that lay on hands can do more to relieve pain than a doctor. |
Putnam I Hilary Putnam Von einem Realistischen Standpunkt In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Frankfurt 1993 Putnam I (a) Hilary Putnam Explanation and Reference, In: Glenn Pearce & Patrick Maynard (eds.), Conceptual Change. D. Reidel. pp. 196--214 (1973) In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (b) Hilary Putnam Language and Reality, in: Mind, Language and Reality: Philosophical Papers, Volume 2. Cambridge University Press. pp. 272-90 (1995 In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (c) Hilary Putnam What is Realism? in: Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 76 (1975):pp. 177 - 194. In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (d) Hilary Putnam Models and Reality, Journal of Symbolic Logic 45 (3), 1980:pp. 464-482. In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (e) Hilary Putnam Reference and Truth In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (f) Hilary Putnam How to Be an Internal Realist and a Transcendental Idealist (at the Same Time) in: R. Haller/W. Grassl (eds): Sprache, Logik und Philosophie, Akten des 4. Internationalen Wittgenstein-Symposiums, 1979 In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (g) Hilary Putnam Why there isn’t a ready-made world, Synthese 51 (2):205--228 (1982) In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (h) Hilary Putnam Pourqui les Philosophes? in: A: Jacob (ed.) L’Encyclopédie PHilosophieque Universelle, Paris 1986 In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (i) Hilary Putnam Realism with a Human Face, Cambridge/MA 1990 In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam I (k) Hilary Putnam "Irrealism and Deconstruction", 6. Giford Lecture, St. Andrews 1990, in: H. Putnam, Renewing Philosophy (The Gifford Lectures), Cambridge/MA 1992, pp. 108-133 In Von einem realistischen Standpunkt, Vincent C. Müller Reinbek 1993 Putnam II Hilary Putnam Representation and Reality, Cambridge/MA 1988 German Edition: Repräsentation und Realität Frankfurt 1999 Putnam III Hilary Putnam Renewing Philosophy (The Gifford Lectures), Cambridge/MA 1992 German Edition: Für eine Erneuerung der Philosophie Stuttgart 1997 Putnam IV Hilary Putnam "Minds and Machines", in: Sidney Hook (ed.) Dimensions of Mind, New York 1960, pp. 138-164 In Künstliche Intelligenz, Walther Ch. Zimmerli/Stefan Wolf Stuttgart 1994 Putnam V Hilary Putnam Reason, Truth and History, Cambridge/MA 1981 German Edition: Vernunft, Wahrheit und Geschichte Frankfurt 1990 Putnam VI Hilary Putnam "Realism and Reason", Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association (1976) pp. 483-98 In Truth and Meaning, Paul Horwich Aldershot 1994 Putnam VII Hilary Putnam "A Defense of Internal Realism" in: James Conant (ed.)Realism with a Human Face, Cambridge/MA 1990 pp. 30-43 In Theories of Truth, Paul Horwich Aldershot 1994 SocPut I Robert D. Putnam Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community New York 2000 |
| Functionalism | Qualia-Theorie Vs Functionalism | Lewis I 54 Qualia Theory VsMaterialism, VsFunctionalism: E.g. you never tasted "Vegemit" (the famous condiment). Thus, you also do not know what it s like to taste Vegemit. No information of the type, the materialists and functionalists talk about, helps. But when you taste it, you will know how it is. Therefore, there is a kind of information that has been overlooked by materialists and functionalists, the phenomenal information. |
Lewis I David K. Lewis Die Identität von Körper und Geist Frankfurt 1989 LewisCl I Clarence Irving Lewis Mind and the World Order: Outline of a Theory of Knowledge (Dover Books on Western Philosophy) 1991 |
| Functionalism | Searle Vs Functionalism | Lanz I 295 Functionalism/Lanz: promises a way out by adopting a level of information processing, the causal and semantic elements 'somehow' integrated. SearleVsFunctionalism/Lanz: there is no explanatorily useful level between folk psychology and neurobiology. The speech of subpersonal cognitive processes is absurd. Cf. >functions. Lanz I 296 SearleVsFunctionalism: there is no explanatorily useful level between folk psychology and neurobiology. The speech of subpersonal cognitive processes is absurd. Computation/computer model of the mind: if a program contains the functional analysis of a psychological ability then the machine on which the program is running owns this psychological ability. The standing behind the program functional analysis then explains what this ability is based on! (SearleVs). SearleVsComputer model: E.g. speech understanding. > Chinese room. The rules for the passenger are such that the Chinese outside get the impression that they led a normal conversation. I 296 But: the successful imitation or simulation of a psychological ability is not a sufficient condition that the simulating machine has the simulated capacity, nor that an explanation of this psychological ability was given. (> simulation/Deutsch). (>Forgery). Chinese roomVsComputer model/VsSimulation as an explanation for skills. |
Searle I John R. Searle The Rediscovery of the Mind, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1992 German Edition: Die Wiederentdeckung des Geistes Frankfurt 1996 Searle II John R. Searle Intentionality. An essay in the philosophy of mind, Cambridge/MA 1983 German Edition: Intentionalität Frankfurt 1991 Searle III John R. Searle The Construction of Social Reality, New York 1995 German Edition: Die Konstruktion der gesellschaftlichen Wirklichkeit Hamburg 1997 Searle IV John R. Searle Expression and Meaning. Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts, Cambridge/MA 1979 German Edition: Ausdruck und Bedeutung Frankfurt 1982 Searle V John R. Searle Speech Acts, Cambridge/MA 1969 German Edition: Sprechakte Frankfurt 1983 Searle VII John R. Searle Behauptungen und Abweichungen In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Searle VIII John R. Searle Chomskys Revolution in der Linguistik In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Searle IX John R. Searle "Animal Minds", in: Midwest Studies in Philosophy 19 (1994) pp. 206-219 In Der Geist der Tiere, D Perler/M. Wild Frankfurt/M. 2005 Lanz I Peter Lanz Vom Begriff des Geistes zur Neurophilosophie In Philosophie im 20. Jahrhundert, A. Hügli/P. Lübcke Reinbek 1993 |
| Functionalism | Verschiedene Vs Functionalism | Münch III 338 Functionalism/Holenstein: its obvious limit refers to the phenomenal qualities. Phenomena are functionally not identifiable. It can be decided whether the property of a thing that two persons assign the adjective "red" to is functionally equivalent for them. However, it is undecidable whether both perceive the same color. Elmar Holenstein, Mentale Gebilde, in: Dieter Münch (Hg) Kognitionswissenschaft, Frankfurt 1992 James I 102 VsFunctionalism,VsPragmatism: The concept of utility is circular and empty. "Everything that is useful for a system" can be understood arbitrarily. VsPragmatism: that James confuses truth with probation: it can never be established whether an observation is correctly translated. (Basic sentence problem, also Quine). Schwarz I 155 VsRoll/VsLewis: a special feature of our mental states is their familiarity. We do not identify them through causal roles. LewisVsVs: integrates introspection into the causal role without further ado. The causal role of conscious experiences includes the fact that (under appropriate circumstances) they produce opinions about their own existence. (1966a(1), 103). 1. David Lewis [1966a]: “An Argument for the Identity Theory”. Journal of Philosophy, 63: 17–25. Mit Erg¨anzungen in David M. Rosenthal (Hg.), Materialism and the Mind-Body Problem, Engelwood Cliffs: Prentica-Hall, 1971 |
Mü III D. Münch (Hrsg.) Kognitionswissenschaft Frankfurt 1992 Schw I W. Schwarz David Lewis Bielefeld 2005 |
| Functionalism | Avramides Vs Functionalism | Avra I 152 objective spirit: cannot use normal behavior for attributing prop. att. I 153 To avoid this the theory of mind must not only refer to behavior but to Armstrong’s "behavior proper". (Which also refers to the mind). Problem: circularity. Avramides: the relevant behavior is not physical! It is impregnated with the mental. Behavior/FunctionalismVsAvramides: the functionalist cannot accept this view of behavior. (because of the circle) If he was also a follower of Grice, he would insist that we can characterize the psychological without reference to interpreted behavior (behavior proper), and that we can reconstruct the semantic, in psychological terms, which in turn are not mentalistically characterized. AvramidesVsFunctionalism: but then he is committed to an objective view of the mind. Also: if he has settled on a non-mentalistic characterization of the inputs and outputs, then he must say what distinguishes mental systems from non-mental ones that have the same functional organization. |
Avr I A. Avramides Meaning and Mind Boston 1989 |
| Functionalism | Schiffer Vs Functionalism | I XVII Functionalism/Schiffer: seems to be better than physicalism if propositions are assumed as belief objects. Belief relation: is represented functionalistically and thus physicalistically acceptable. SchifferVsFunctionalism: cannot be correct. SchifferVsPropositions. (late). |
Schi I St. Schiffer Remnants of Meaning Cambridge 1987 |
| Functionalism | Stalnaker Vs Functionalism | I 219 Inverted spectra/inverted qualia//Stalnaker: if that were possible how could we talk about it? Both persons (of whom one would have a reversed spectra) would call red things red. The only thing that would be different would be the inner experiences, experiences that we cannot compare because we are not in a position to do so. Lately the problem is taken more seriously again. This raises problems especially VsFunctionalism and VsMaterialism. It has consequences for the concept of mind or the consciousness and intentionality. VsInner experiences/Stalnaker: 1. Wittgenstein is skeptical about them. 2. VerificationismVsInternalism. |
Stalnaker I R. Stalnaker Ways a World may be Oxford New York 2003 |
| Gadamer, G. | Block Vs Gadamer, G. | Avra I 149 Input/Output/BlockVsFunctionalism/BlockVsLewis: no matter how functionalism characterizes input and output, it leads into the dilemma of being either chauvinistic or liberal. ((s) liberal: attributing mind to too many systems (e.g. vending machines)/chauvinistic: too few: E.g.: deny animals mind). I 150 Input/Output/BlockVsFunctionalism/VsLewis any physical characterization of inputs and outputs is inevitably chauvinist or liberal: E.g. assuming you were seriously injured and your only way to communicate with the outside world is through electroencephalogram patterns. If you find something exciting, it produces a pattern that the others interpret as a point, if it is a bit boring, a line. Now let us imagine, on the other hand, others communicate with you by creating electronic activity that leaves long or short afterimages in you. In this case, we could say that the brain itself has become a part of the inputs and outputs! (at the top we had determined variable realization as an essential progress, however). But: Block: if this point (of variable implementation) is correct VsMaterialism, it also applies to inputs and outputs, because the physical realization itself may be an essential part of the inputs and outputs. ((s) input output devices: receptors?). I.e. there is no physical characterization which refers on inputs and output of all and only mental systems. (Block 1980b, p.295). Conclusion/Block: any physical characterization of Inputs/Outputs is either chauvinistic or liberal. |
Block I N. Block Consciousness, Function, and Representation: Collected Papers, Volume 1 (Bradford Books) Cambridge 2007 Block II Ned Block "On a confusion about a function of consciousness" In Bewusstein, Thomas Metzinger Paderborn/München/Wien/Zürich 1996 |
| James, W. | Verschiedene Vs James, W. | James I 102 VsFunctionalism, VsPragmatism: The concept of utility is circular and empty. "Anything that is useful for a system" can be interpreted arbitrarily. PragmatismVs: VsJames: confused truth with probation: it can never be determined whether an observation is translated correctly. (Basis sentence-problem - Quine ditto). |
|
| Materialism | Functionalism Vs Materialism | Danto2 I 272 FunctionalismVsMaterialism: functionalism has created serious problems for materialist theories of the mind. One cannot say that the mind is nothing other than the brain, and consequently nothing more than this material system, when the mind itself can be defined functionally, when something is given that supports all its features, but otherwise is different from the brain. How can the mind be equated with the brain and with the computer, if on the other hand the computer and the brain cannot be equated with each other? Identity is transitive. That would not be fulfilled here. Avra I 148 Holism/Avramides: therefore one sometimes says that behaviorism does not manage to find an access to the holism of the mental. Solution: Functionalism: was specially designed to take this holism into account. FunctionalismVsMaterialism: has in relation to holism an advantage over the old materialism, which is sometimes called "central state materialism". (e.g. Smart 1969, Place 1969). Def Central State Materialism/Avramides: (is a type of physicalism). Mental states and mental events can be reduced to physical states and events. Problem: then certain beings cannot have a mind because of the certain form of their inner structure. Solution: Functionalism: now allows "variable realization" of states of mind. Thus it identifies mentality not with a property of the 1st level, but with a property of the 2nd level (property of property). Property 2nd level of systems. Functional property: is a property of a property. I.e. even beings without grey matter in their skulls can still be characterized as sensitive, cognitive beings. (Variable Realization). Variable Realization/Functionalism: can assume variable realization, because it does not refer to certain structure or matter, but to inputs and outputs. Thus he can avoid the problems of reductionism and Cartesianism. He still refers to behavior. AvramidesVsFunctionalism: but it is still independent of "normal evidence" (normal behavior). At first the attribution must not refer to the irreducible mental (otherwise circular). But this is not yet certain with the reference to input/output. I 149 Solution/Lewis: his version of functionalism (1972,83a,83d)). |
|
| Materialism | Qualia-Theorie Vs Materialism | Lewis I 54 Qualia Theory Vsmaterialism,Vsfunctionalism: E.g. you have never tasted "Vegemit" (the famous condiment). Thus, you do not know what it s like to taste Vegemit .Not as much information of the type, the materialists and functionalists talk about, helps. But when they taste it, they will know how it. Therefore, there is a kind of information that have been overlooked by materialists and functionalists: the phenomenal information. |
Lewis I David K. Lewis Die Identität von Körper und Geist Frankfurt 1989 LewisCl I Clarence Irving Lewis Mind and the World Order: Outline of a Theory of Knowledge (Dover Books on Western Philosophy) 1991 |
| Pragmatism | Verschiedene Vs Pragmatism | James I 102 VsFunctionalism/VsPragmatism: The concept of utility is circular and empty. "Everything that is useful for a system" can be interpreted arbitrarily. VsPragmatism: James confused truth with justification: it can never be determined whether an observation is translated correctly. (Basic sentence problem, see also Quine). Rorty VI 112 G. K. ChestertonVsPragmatism: Z "Pragmatism is about human needs, and one of the first human needs is to be more than a pragmatist." Rorty VI 306 VsPragmatism: well-known accusation: he actually behaves conservatively and has prejudices in favor of the status quo .(e.g. Jonathan Culler). VI 307 CullerVsRorty: what you do must be based on your beliefs, since there is no foundation outside the system of your beliefs, the only thing that could logically cause you to modify a belief is something you already believe. (Contradiction). Rorty: He's right, but he's wrong, if he only allows us logical reasons as respectable! Most moral and mental progress has not come about through "logical" changes of belief! |
Rorty I Richard Rorty Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, Princeton/NJ 1979 German Edition: Der Spiegel der Natur Frankfurt 1997 Rorty II Richard Rorty Philosophie & die Zukunft Frankfurt 2000 Rorty II (b) Richard Rorty "Habermas, Derrida and the Functions of Philosophy", in: R. Rorty, Truth and Progress. Philosophical Papers III, Cambridge/MA 1998 In Philosophie & die Zukunft, Frankfurt/M. 2000 Rorty II (c) Richard Rorty Analytic and Conversational Philosophy Conference fee "Philosophy and the other hgumanities", Stanford Humanities Center 1998 In Philosophie & die Zukunft, Frankfurt/M. 2000 Rorty II (d) Richard Rorty Justice as a Larger Loyalty, in: Ronald Bontekoe/Marietta Stepanians (eds.) Justice and Democracy. Cross-cultural Perspectives, University of Hawaii 1997 In Philosophie & die Zukunft, Frankfurt/M. 2000 Rorty II (e) Richard Rorty Spinoza, Pragmatismus und die Liebe zur Weisheit, Revised Spinoza Lecture April 1997, University of Amsterdam In Philosophie & die Zukunft, Frankfurt/M. 2000 Rorty II (f) Richard Rorty "Sein, das verstanden werden kann, ist Sprache", keynote lecture for Gadamer’ s 100th birthday, University of Heidelberg In Philosophie & die Zukunft, Frankfurt/M. 2000 Rorty II (g) Richard Rorty "Wild Orchids and Trotzky", in: Wild Orchids and Trotzky: Messages form American Universities ed. Mark Edmundson, New York 1993 In Philosophie & die Zukunft, Frankfurt/M. 2000 Rorty III Richard Rorty Contingency, Irony, and solidarity, Chambridge/MA 1989 German Edition: Kontingenz, Ironie und Solidarität Frankfurt 1992 Rorty IV (a) Richard Rorty "is Philosophy a Natural Kind?", in: R. Rorty, Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth. Philosophical Papers Vol. I, Cambridge/Ma 1991, pp. 46-62 In Eine Kultur ohne Zentrum, Stuttgart 1993 Rorty IV (b) Richard Rorty "Non-Reductive Physicalism" in: R. Rorty, Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth. Philosophical Papers Vol. I, Cambridge/Ma 1991, pp. 113-125 In Eine Kultur ohne Zentrum, Stuttgart 1993 Rorty IV (c) Richard Rorty "Heidegger, Kundera and Dickens" in: R. Rorty, Essays on Heidegger and Others. Philosophical Papers Vol. 2, Cambridge/MA 1991, pp. 66-82 In Eine Kultur ohne Zentrum, Stuttgart 1993 Rorty IV (d) Richard Rorty "Deconstruction and Circumvention" in: R. Rorty, Essays on Heidegger and Others. Philosophical Papers Vol. 2, Cambridge/MA 1991, pp. 85-106 In Eine Kultur ohne Zentrum, Stuttgart 1993 Rorty V (a) R. Rorty "Solidarity of Objectivity", Howison Lecture, University of California, Berkeley, January 1983 In Solidarität oder Objektivität?, Stuttgart 1998 Rorty V (b) Richard Rorty "Freud and Moral Reflection", Edith Weigert Lecture, Forum on Psychiatry and the Humanities, Washington School of Psychiatry, Oct. 19th 1984 In Solidarität oder Objektivität?, Stuttgart 1988 Rorty V (c) Richard Rorty The Priority of Democracy to Philosophy, in: John P. Reeder & Gene Outka (eds.), Prospects for a Common Morality. Princeton University Press. pp. 254-278 (1992) In Solidarität oder Objektivität?, Stuttgart 1988 Rorty VI Richard Rorty Truth and Progress, Cambridge/MA 1998 German Edition: Wahrheit und Fortschritt Frankfurt 2000 |
| Putnam, H. | Searle Vs Putnam, H. | Searle passim Core thesis: (VsPutnam): meanings are in the head! Because perception is self-respect and delivers the performance conditions itself. Propositions, characters are also only objects in the world. But their power representation is not intrinsical! It is derived from the intentionality of the mind. I 34 SearleVsFunctionalism/SearleVsPutnam: the actual mental phenomena, however, have nothing to do with attributes but are subjective first-person phenomena. II 91 Twin Earth/Putnam: the world takes command. II 92 SearleVsPutnam: that is not enough. Tradition: two mistakes: 1. assumption, any intentional content is an isolated unit. 2. assumption, causation is always a non-intentional relation. Intentionality/causality/Searle: there is a relevance of causality. 1. Network and background affect fulfilling conditions. 2. intentional causation is always in an internal relation to the fulfilling conditions. 3. a person stands in indexical relation with their own intentional states, network, and background. (Each with its own background). II 93 Causality: occurs as part of the intentional content. Previously Bill must have identified Sally as Sally, so it belongs to the fulfillment of conditions, it must be caused by Sally and not by Twin-Sally. His current experience has to make reference to this earlier identification. Indexicality: the experience is not merely an experience that someone has. It is the experience of someone with the specific network and the special background. (...) Twin Earth (TE) Example's interchange of the two Sallys in childhood. How may it be that both express the same proposition and have identical qualitative experiences and yet mean something different? II 97 TE/Searle: Experiences are in fact "qualitatively identical" but have different content and different fulfillment conditions. Recognition: one has the ability to recognize somebody here on earth but this ability itself does not need to include representation yet to exist in them! The difference between the two twins is that their experiences refer to their own background skills. (Indexicality). II 250 SearleVsPutnam: all the arguments have in common that according to them the inner intentional content of the speaker is not sufficient to determine what he refers to. II 251 SearleVsPutnam : the thesis that the meaning determines the reference can hardly be falsified by the consideration of cases where speakers do not even know the meaning! Intension and extension are not defined relative to idiolects! To mean/tradition: Intension is an abstract entity, which can be more or less detected by individual speakers. But it is not enough to show that the speaker does not like or have recorded only incompletely the intension, because such a speaker also had no relevant extension! SearleVsPutnam: this one would have to suggest that the totality of intentional states of speakers (including experts) does not determine the correct extension. Searle: it is for the experts to decide. Elms/beeches/Searle: I know that beeches are no elms. How do I know that? Because I know that there are different species of tree. I have thus formulated conceptual knowledge. II 257 SearleVsPutnam: a murderer is not defined by the microstructure. II 257/258 SearleVsPutnam: Another point: Putnam makes certain assumptions: never anyone came up with the idea to extend the traditional thesis that intension determines the extension to these indexical words. Example "I have a headache" (Twin Earth). But the extension of "I" is another. It has in two different idiolects two different extensions. Searle: But it does not follow that the concept, I have of myself, is in any way different from the concept that my doppelganger has of himself. SearleVsPutnam: Putnam assumes that the tradition cannot be applied to indexical expressions. 2. that fulfillment conditions must also be identical with the doppelganger. Searle: both is wrong. Searle: if we understand intentional content under "intension" it just yet determines the extension. In addition, two persons may be in type identical mental states and yet their intentional contents may be different. They can have different truth conditions. II 259 Searle: suppose Jones christens 1750 water indexically on Earth and Twin Jones on Twin Earth. Type identical intellectual content and visual experiences Putnam: because they now give the same definition, Putnam assumes that we cannot explain with drawing on their mental content that they are two different extensions. Searle: simple answer: they do not have type identical intentional contents. Because these contents are self-referential. The fulfillment conditions are set. Different things are meant in both cases. (> to mean; >meaning/intending). III 173 SearleVsPutnam: confuses two logically independent theses under his label "metaphysical realism": 1. reality exists independently of our representations. 2. there is exactly one correct conceptual schema for the description of reality (privileged scheme: PS). Searle: Putnam sees quite truely that the external realism refutes the privileged scheme. The metaphysical realism is the conjunction of these two. SearleVsPutnam: but you do not refute both by refuting one of the conjunction members. The falsity of the privileged scheme lets the external realism untouched. |
Searle I John R. Searle The Rediscovery of the Mind, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1992 German Edition: Die Wiederentdeckung des Geistes Frankfurt 1996 Searle IX John R. Searle "Animal Minds", in: Midwest Studies in Philosophy 19 (1994) pp. 206-219 In Der Geist der Tiere, D Perler/M. Wild Frankfurt/M. 2005 |
| |||
| Disputed term/author/ism | Pro/Versus |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Functionalism | Versus | Field II 30 Field: per materialism, per physicalism -FieldVsFunctionalism / FieldVsLewis: not sufficient for Brentano s problem - FieldVsInstrumentalism: belief ascriptions can be literally true and they are not just useful tools. |
Field I H. Field Realism, Mathematics and Modality Oxford New York 1989 Field IV Hartry Field "Realism and Relativism", The Journal of Philosophy, 76 (1982), pp. 553-67 In Theories of Truth, Paul Horwich Aldershot 1994 |
| |||