Naturalism Without Representationalism
| Abstract | Naturalism as spare as this is by no means platitudinous. However, most opposition to naturalism in contemporary philosophy is not opposition to naturalism in this basic sense, but to a more specific view of the relevance of science to philosophy. Similarly on the pro-naturalistic side. What most self-styled naturalists have in mind is the more specific view. As a result, I think, both sides of the contemporary debate pay insufficient attention to a different kind of philosophical naturalism — a different view of the impact of science on philosophy. This different view is certainly not new — it has been with us at least since Hume — but nor is it prominent in many contemporary debates | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,631 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesDavid Copp (2003). Why Naturalism? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 6 (2):179-200.
Jaegwon Kim (2003). The American Origins of Philosophical Naturalism. Journal of Philosophical Research 28:83-98.
Steven Horst (2009). Naturalisms in Philosophy of Mind. Philosophy Compass 4 (1):219-254.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads83 ( #9,012 of 548,939 )Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #19,203 of 548,939 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
