Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||Most readers of Sellars' philosophy learn about a Manifest-Scientific Image distinction, and because apparently nothing significant hinges on what at first sight seems just a neologistic labeling of a familiar distinction, it is henceforth wrongly associated with a pre-systematic commonsense/scientific framework distinction. The Manifest Image is not identical to the commonsense framework; nor is the Scientific Image identical to the scientific framework. In this paper I will concern myself only with arguing that the Manifest Image is not identical to the commonsense framework.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Jaap van Brakel (1996). Interdiscourse or Supervenience Relations: The Primacy of the Manifest Image. Synthese 106 (2):253-97.
Stephen David Ross (2009). For Giving. International Studies in Philosophy Monograph Series:469-504.
Martin Kurthen (1990). Qualia, Sensa Und Absolute Prozesse. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 21 (1):25 - 46.
Fernando Birman (2010). Pragmatic Concerns and Images of the World. Philosophia 38 (4):715-731.
William A. Rottschaefer (2011). Why Wilfrid Sellars Is Right (and Right-Wing). Journal of Philosophical Research 36:291-325.
James R. O.’Shea (2011). How to Be a Kantian and a Naturalist About Human Knowledge. Journal of Philosophical Research 36:327-359.
Herman Philipse (2001). What is a Natural Conception of the World? International Journal of Philosophical Studies 9 (3):385 – 399.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads56 ( #21,352 of 723,043 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 723,043 )
How can I increase my downloads?