Dialectica 57 (4):431-38 (2003)
|Abstract||Jerry Fodor and Ernie Lepore have argued that inferential roles are not compositional. It is unclear, however, whether the theories at which they aim their objection are obliged to meet the strong compositionality requirement they have in mind. But even if that requirement is accepted, the data they adduce can in fact be derived from an inferential-role theory that meets it. Technically this is trivial, but it raises some interesting objections turning on the issue of the generality of inferential roles. I explain how those objections can be met. Whether Fodor’s and Lepore’s strong compositionality requirement is justified or not, then, inferential-role theories do not have the problem that they claim to have identified.|
|Keywords||compositionality Brandom, R Fodor, J Lepore, E|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Mark McCullagh (2005). Inferentialism and Singular Reference. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 35 (2):183-220.
Ernie Lepore (2004). Out of Context. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 78 (2):77 - 94.
Jerry Fodor & Ernie Lepore (2001). Brandom's Burdens: Compositionality and Inferentialism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (2):465-481.
Ernie Lepore & Jerry Fodor (2001). Brandom's Burdens: Compositionality and Inferentialism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (2):465–481.
Andrew Jorgensen (2008). Understanding as Endorsing an Inference. Polish Journal of Philosophy 2 (1):35-54.
Jerry A. Fodor & Ernest Lepore (2002). The Compositionality Papers. Oxford University Press.
Ted A. Warfield (1993). On a Semantic Argument Against Conceptual Role Semantics. Analysis 53 (4):298-304.
Martin Montminy (2005). A Non-Compositional Inferential Role Theory. Erkenntnis 62 (2):211-233.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #93,408 of 549,125 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,125 )
How can I increase my downloads?