Graduate studies at Western
In Christina E. Erneling & David Martel Johnson (eds.), Mind As a Scientific Object. Oxford University Press (2004)
|Abstract||Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Eliminative materialism, as William Lycan (this volume) tells us, is materialism plus the claim that no creature has ever had a belief, desire, intention, hope, wish, or other â€œfolk-psychologicalâ€ state. Some contemporary philosophers claim that eliminative materialism is very likely true. They sketch certain potential scenarios, for the way theory might develop in cognitive science and neuroscience, that they claim are fairly likely; and they maintain that if such scenarios turned out to be the truth about humans, then eliminative materialism would be true. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Broadly speaking, there are two ways to reply to such arguments, for those who maintain that eliminative materialism is false (or that the likelihood of its being true is very low). One way is to argue that the scenarios the eliminativists envision are themselves extremely unlikelyâ€”that we can be very confident, given what we now know (including nontendentious scientific knowledge), that those scenarios will not come to pass. The other is to argue that even if they did come to pass, this would not undermine common-sense psychology anyway. People would still have beliefs, etc. The two strategies are not incompatible; one could pursue them both. But the second strategy attacks eliminativism at a more fundamental level. And if it can be successfully carried out, then the dialectical state of play will be strikingly secure for folk psychology. For, then it will turn out that folk psychology simply is not hostage to the kinds of potential empirical-theoretical developments that the eliminativists envision. It doesnâ€™t matter, as far as the integrity of folk psychology is concerned, whether or not such scenarios are likely to come to pass. Eliminativist arguments inevitably rely, often only implicitly, on certain assumptions about what it takes for a creature to have beliefs, desires, and other folk-psychological statesâ€”assumptions about some alleged necessary condition(s) for being a true believer (to adapt this colorful usage from Dennett 1987)..|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Maurice K. D. Schouten & Huib L. de Jong (1998). Defusing Eliminative Materialism: Reference and Revision. Philosophical Psychology 11 (4):489-509.
Teed Rockwell, Beyond Eliminative Materialism: Some Unnoticed Implications of Paul Churchland's Pragmatic Pluralism.
Rod Bertolet (1994). Saving Eliminativism. Philosophical Psychology 7 (1):87-100.
John D. Greenwood (1992). Against Eliminative Materialism: From Folk Psychology to Volkerpsychologie. Philosophical Psychology 5 (4):349-68.
William G. Lycan (2005). A Particularly Compelling Refutation of Eliminative Materialism. In D. M. Johnson & C. E. Erneling (eds.), The Mind as a Scientific Object: Between Brain and Culture. Oup.
Robert K. Shope (1979). Eliminating Mistakes About Eliminative Materialism. Philosophy of Science 46 (4):590-612.
John M. Preston (1989). Folk Psychology as Theory or Practice? The Case for Eliminative Materialism. Inquiry 32 (September):277-303.
Kenneth A. Taylor (1994). How Not to Refute Eliminative Materialism. Philosophical Psychology 7 (1):101-125.
Terence E. Horgan & David K. Henderson (2005). What Does It Take to Be a True Believer? Against the Opulent Ideology of Eliminative Materialism. In Christina E. Erneling & D. Johnson (eds.), Mind As a Scientific Object. Oxford University Press.
David Henderson & Terry Horgan (2004). What Does It Take to Be a True Believer? In Christina E. Erneling & David Martel Johnson (eds.), Mind As a Scientific Object: Between Brain and Culture. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads54 ( #22,532 of 739,315 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,029 of 739,315 )
How can I increase my downloads?