David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Inquiry 51 (5):512 – 531 (2008)
Sellars and McDowell, among others, attribute a prominent role to the Myth of the Given. In this paper, I suggest that they have in mind two different versions of the Myth of the Given and I argue that Kant is not the target of one version and, though explicitly under attack from the other, has resources sufficient to mount a satisfactory response. What is essential to this response is a proper understanding of (empirical) concepts as involving unifying functions that can take sensations as input and deliver normative representations as outputs. By understanding concepts in this way, one need not, as the second version of the Myth of the Given maintains, take sensations to be both natural and normative. Instead, they can be understood as the natural effects of external objects on us, but natural effects that can nonetheless play a role in a normative process because the concepts that are responsible for the normativity of the results can require that such natural effects be present as inputs into the process.
|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
Aaron M. Griffith (2012). Perception and the Categories: A Conceptualist Reading of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. European Journal of Philosophy 20 (2):193-222.
Colin McLear (2014). The Kantian (Non)‐Conceptualism Debate. Philosophy Compass 9 (11):769-790.
Eric Watkins (2009). Kant on the Hiddenness of God. Kantian Review 14 (1):81-122.
Margit Ruffing (2010). Kant-Bibliographie 2008. Kant-Studien 101 (4):487-538.
Similar books and articles
Refeng Tang (2010). Conceptualism and the New Myth of the Given. Synthese 175 (1):101-122.
Susan L. Hurley (1996). Myth Upon Myth. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 96:253-260.
Robert Hanna (2011). The Myth of the Given and the Grip of the Given. Diametros 27:25-46.
Stefanie Grüne (2011). Is There a Gap in Kant's B Deduction? International Journal of Philosophical Studies 19 (3):465 - 490.
Desh Raj Sirswal (2007). GILBERRT RYLE ON DESCARTES' MYTH. K.U. Research Journal of Arts and Humanities (Jan.-Dec.2007):81-86.
Ursula Renz (2011). From Philosophy to Criticism of Myth: Cassirer's Concept of Myth. Synthese 179 (1):135 - 152.
Daniel Bonevac (2002). Sellars Vs. The Given. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (1):1-30.
Added to index2009-02-04
Total downloads92 ( #43,379 of 1,792,869 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #138,883 of 1,792,869 )
How can I increase my downloads?