David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Mind and Language 22 (3):270–296 (2007)
Bermúdez (2003) argues that (T1) nonlinguistic creatures can think thoughts about protocausal conditional states of affairs and engage in rudimentary forms of reasoning, but (T2) they cannot ‘in principle’ think thoughts about thoughts (propositions)—in particular, they cannot have higher-order propositional attitudes (PAs). I reconstruct Bermúdez’s argument for T2 and show that it rests upon an implausible empirical assumption and is, therefore, not a threat to current empirical research into nonlinguistic higher-order PAs. I argue that even on an interpretation of the argument that would pose a threat to this research, a parallel argument would seem to disprove T1. Finally, I argue that on an interpretation of Bermúdez’s argument that would not pose a threat to the above empirical research but would still present a significant philosophical thesis about thought and language, the argument either appears to confuse thoughts with their representational vehicles or the representational vehicles of thoughts with those representations used to hold thoughts in mind
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
François Recanati (2009). De Re and de Se. Dialectica 63 (3):249-269.
Edouard Machery (2005). You Don't Know How You Think: Introspection and Language of Thought. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (3):469-485.
John Sutton (2004). Are Concepts Mental Representations or Abstracta? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (1):89-108.
Sean Crawford (1998). In Defence of Object-Dependent Thoughts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 98 (2):201-210.
José Luis Bermúdez (2003). 'I'-Thoughts and Explanation: Reply to Garrett. Philosophical Quarterly 53 (212):432–436.
T. Parent (2007). Infallibilism About Self-Knowledge. Philosophical Studies 133 (3):411-424.
Sanford C. Goldberg (2005). The Dialectical Context of Boghossian's Memory Argument. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 35 (1):135-48.
Teresa Marques (2006). On an Argument of Segal's Against Singular Object-Dependent Thoughts. Disputatio 2 (26):19-37.
Michael Glanzberg (2008). Quantification and Contributing Objects to Thoughts. Noûs 42 (1):207 - 231.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads42 ( #33,122 of 1,004,688 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,743 of 1,004,688 )
How can I increase my downloads?