David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 9 (1):113-131 (2010)
Stanley and Williamson (The Journal of Philosophy 98(8), 411–444 2001 ) reject the fundamental distinction between what Ryle once called ‘knowing-how’ and ‘knowing-that’. They claim that knowledge-how is just a species of knowledge-that, i.e. propositional knowledge, and try to establish their claim relying on the standard semantic analysis of ‘knowing-how’ sentences. We will undermine their strategy by arguing that ‘knowing-how’ phrases are under-determined such that there is not only one semantic analysis and by critically discussing and refuting the positive account of knowing-how they offer. Furthermore, we argue for an extension of the classical ‘knowing-how’/‘knowing-that’-dichotomy by presenting a new threefold framework: Using some core-examples of the recent debate, we will show that we can analyze knowledge situations that are not captured by the Rylean dichotomy and argue that, therefore, the latter has to be displaced by a more fine-grained theory of knowledge-formats. We will distinguish three different formats of knowledge we can have of our actions, namely (1) propositional, (2) practical, and (3) image-like formats of knowledge. Furthermore, we will briefly analyze the underlying representations of each of these knowledge-formats.
|Keywords||Knowing how Ability Propositional knowledge Ryle Mental representations|
|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
Gilbert Ryle (1949/2002). The Concept of Mind. Hutchinson and Co.
John Perry (2009). Reference and Reflexivity. Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Jerry A. Fodor (1998). Concepts: Where Cognitive Science Went Wrong. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
L. C. De Bruin & Albert Newen (2012). An Association Account of False Belief Understanding. Cognition 123 (2):240-259.
Cheng-Hung Tsai (2011). The Metaepistemology of Knowing-How. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 10 (4):541-556.
Gottfried Vosgerau (2010). Memory and Content. Consciousness and Cognition 19 (3):838-846.
Similar books and articles
Yu Zhenhua (2003). Tacit Knowledge/Knowing and the Problem of Articulation. Tradition and Discovery 30 (2):11-23.
Gregor Damschen (2009). Dispositional Knowledge-How Versus Propositional Knowledge-That. In Gregor Damschen, Robert Schnepf & Karsten Stueber (eds.), Debating Dispositions. Issues in Metaphysics, Epistemology and Philosophy of Mind. De Gruyter
Refeng Tang (2011). Knowing That, Knowing How, and Knowing to Do. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 6 (3):426-442.
Michael David Roth (1970). Knowing. New York,Random House.
Christos Douskos (2013). The Linguistic Argument for Intellectualism. Synthese 190 (12):2325-2340.
David Bzdak (2008). On Amnesia and Knowing-How. Techne 12 (1):36-47.
Jason Stanley & Timothy Williamson (2001). Knowing How. Journal of Philosophy 98 (8):411-444.
Christopher Winch (2009). Ryle on Knowing How and the Possibility of Vocational Education. Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (1):88-101.
Dale Cannon (2002). Construing Polanyi's Tacit Knowing as Knowing by Acquaintance Rather Than Knowing by Representation. Tradition and Discovery 29 (2):26-43.
Added to index2009-05-18
Total downloads178 ( #19,326 of 1,796,208 )
Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #85,286 of 1,796,208 )
How can I increase my downloads?