David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Southern Journal of Philosophy 45 (3):435-454 (2007)
Part of Sellars’s general attack on the Myth of the Given is his endorsement of psychological nominalism, a view that implies that awareness of our own mental states is not given but must be earned.Sellars provides an account of how such awareness might have been earned with the Myth of Jones. Such an account is important for Sellars, for without it the Given can look necessary after all. But aproblem with such accounts is that they can look extremely implausible. Sellars himself seems unconcerned to make his account plausible, and so others have stepped in here. But, I argue, they have done so in ways that fail to respect his psychological nominalism. This evinces, as well as reinforces, a lack of sensitivity to the scope of Sellars’s attack on the Given, the aim of which is the dismantling of “the entire framework of givenness.” In this essay, I show how one can make Sellars’s Myth of Jones plausible, while still respecting his psychological nominalism, by seeing how Jones’s thought is governed by the norms of rationality as interpretability
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
William A. Rottschaefer (2011). The Middle Does Not Hold. Journal of Philosophical Research 36:361-369.
Eric M. Rubinstein (2006). Sellars' Philosophy of Mind. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Thomas Vinci (1998). The Myth of the Myth of the Given. Problems From Wilfrid Sellars- Writing on Sellars.
Timm Triplett & Willem A. DeVries (2006). Is Sellars's Rylean Hypothesis Plausible? A Dialogue. In Michael P. Wolf & Mark Norris Lance (eds.), Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities. Rodopi 85-114.
Caleb Liang (2006). Phenomenal Character and the Myth of the Given. Journal of Philosophical Research 31:21-36.
Daniel Bonevac (2002). Sellars Vs. The Given. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (1):1-30.
William P. Alston (2002). Sellars and the "Myth of the Given". Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 65 (1):69-86.
James R. O'Shea (2012). The 'Theory Theory' of Mind and the Aims of Sellars' Original Myth of Jones. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 11 (2):175-204.
Mitch Parsell (2011). Sellars on Thoughts and Beliefs. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 10 (2):261-275.
Aaron Allen Schiller (2007). Psychological Nominalism and the Plausibility of Sellars's Myth of Jones. Southern Journal of Philosophy 45 (3):435-454.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads41 ( #115,736 of 1,940,983 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #272,533 of 1,940,983 )
How can I increase my downloads?