David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Psychology 12 (3):283-295 (1999)
Stephen Pinker sets out over a dozen arguments in The language instinct (Morrow, New York, 1994) for his widely shared view that natural language is inadequate as a medium for thought. Thus he argues we must suppose that the primary medium of thought and inference is an innate propositional representation system, mentalese. I reply to the various arguments and so defend the view that some thought essentially involves natural language. I argue mentalese doesn't solve any of the problems Pinker cites for the view that we think in natural language. So I don't think I think the way he thinks I think.
|Keywords||Language Mental Science Fodor, J Pinker, S|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Jerry A. Fodor (1975). The Language of Thought. Harvard University Press.
Steven Pinker (1995). The Language Instinct. Harper Perennial.
Christopher Gauker (1992). The Lockean Theory of Communication. Noûs 26 (3):303-324.
Citations of this work BETA
William S. Robinson (2005). Thoughts Without Distinctive Non-Imagistic Phenomenology. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (3):534-561.
Similar books and articles
Stephen Laurence & Eric Margolis (1997). Regress Arguments Against the Language of Thought. Analysis 57 (1):60-66.
Stephen R. Schiffer (1991). Does Mentalese Have a Compositional Semantics? In Barry M. Loewer & Georges Rey (eds.), Meaning in Mind: Fodor and His Critics. Blackwell
Dominic Murphy (2006). On Fodor's Analogy: Why Psychology is Like Philosophy of Science After All. Mind and Language 21 (5):553-564.
Michael Rescorla (2009). Cognitive Maps and the Language of Thought. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (2):377-407.
Steven Pinker (2005). A Reply to Jerry Fodor on How the Mind Works. Mind and Language 20 (1):33-38.
Jerry A. Fodor (2005). Reply to Steven Pinker So How Does the Mind Work?. Mind and Language 20 (1):25-32.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads63 ( #52,248 of 1,725,194 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #81,183 of 1,725,194 )
How can I increase my downloads?