Philosophical Explorations 2 (2):79 – 95 (1999)
|Abstract||The demand for 'criteria of correctness' to identify recurring particulars in Wittgenstein's private language argument favors an idealist interpretation of quantum phenomena.The indeterminacy principle in quantum physics and the logic of the private language argument share a common concern with the limitations by which microphysical or sensation particulars can be reidentified. Wittgenstein's criteria for reidentifying particular recurrent private sensations are so general as to apply with equal force to quantum particulars, and to support the idealist thesis that quantum phenomena are themselves essentially mental or dependent on mental occurrences.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
George Darby (2010). Quantum Mechanics and Metaphysical Indeterminacy. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (2):227-245.
Douglas N. Walton & K. T. Strongman (1998). Neonate Crusoes, the Private Language Argument and Psychology. Philosophical Psychology 11 (4):443-65.
P. von Morstein (1980). Kripke, Wittgenstein and the Private Language Argument. Grazer Philosophische Studien 11:61-74.
Paul K. Moser (1992). Beyond the Private Language Argument. Metaphilosophy 23 (1-2):77-89.
M. Shabbir Ahsen, Private Language Questions in Contemporary Analytical Philosophy Analytical Study of Wittgenstein's Treatments of Private Language and its Implications.
E. D. Klemke (1971). Essays on Wittgenstein. Urbana,University of Illinois Press.
David Bain (2004). Private Languages and Private Theorists. Philosophical Quarterly 54 (216):427 - 434.
John A. Humphrey (1996). Kripke's Wittgenstein and the Impossibility of Private Language: The Same Old Story? Journal of Philosophical Research 21 (January):197-207.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads31 ( #39,272 of 548,999 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?