Search results for 'Generality' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Kelly Becker (2008). Epistemic Luck and the Generality Problem. Philosophical Studies 139 (3):353 - 366.score: 24.0
    Epistemic luck has been the focus of much discussion recently. Perhaps the most general knowledge-precluding type is veritic luck, where a belief is true but might easily have been false. Veritic luck has two sources, and so eliminating it requires two distinct conditions for a theory of knowledge. I argue that, when one sets out those conditions properly, a solution to the generality problem for reliabilism emerges.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Earl Conee (2013). The Specificity of the Generality Problem. Philosophical Studies 163 (3):751-762.score: 24.0
    In “Why the generality problem is everybody’s problem,” Michael Bishop argues that every theory of justification needs a solution to the generality problem. He contends that a solution is needed in order for any theory to be used in giving an acceptable account of the justificatory status of beliefs in certain examples. In response, first I will describe the generality problem that is specific to process reliabilism and two other sorts of problems that are essentially the same. (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Jacob Beck (2012). The Generality Constraint and the Structure of Thought. Mind 121 (483):563-600.score: 24.0
    According to the Generality Constraint, mental states with conceptual content must be capable of recombining in certain systematic ways. Drawing on empirical evidence from cognitive science, I argue that so-called analogue magnitude states violate this recombinability condition and thus have nonconceptual content. I further argue that this result has two significant consequences: it demonstrates that nonconceptual content seeps beyond perception and infiltrates cognition; and it shows that whether mental states have nonconceptual content is largely an empirical matter determined by (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Michael A. Bishop (2010). Why the Generality Problem is Everybody's Problem. Philosophical Studies 151 (2):285 - 298.score: 24.0
    The generality problem is widely considered to be a devastating objection to reliabilist theories of justification. My goal in this paper is to argue that a version of the generality problem applies to all plausible theories of justification. Assume that any plausible theory must allow for the possibility of reflective justification—S's belief, B, is justified on the basis of S's knowledge that she arrived at B as a result of a highly (but not perfectly) reliable way of reasoning, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Mark Newman (2010). The No-Miracles Argument, Reliabilism, and a Methodological Version of the Generality Problem. Synthese 177 (1):111 - 138.score: 24.0
    The No-Miracles Argument (NMA) is often used to support scientific realism. We can formulate this argument as an inference to the best explanation this accusation of circularity by appealing to reliabilism, an externalist epistemology. In this paper I argue that this retreat fails. Reliabilism suffers from a potentially devastating difficulty known as the Generality Problem and attempts to solve this problem require adopting both epistemic and metaphysical assumptions regarding local scientific theories. Although the externalist can happily adopt the former, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Christopher Lepock (2009). How to Make the Generality Problem Work for You. Acta Analytica 24 (4):275-286.score: 24.0
    Reliabilist theories of knowledge face the “generality problem”; any token of a belief-forming processes instantiates types of different levels of generality, which can vary in reliability. I argue that we exploit this situation in epistemic evaluation; we appraise beliefs in different ways by adverting to reliability at different levels of generality. We can detect at least two distinct uses of reliability, which underlie different sorts of appraisals of beliefs and believers.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Jonathan D. Matheson (forthcoming). Is There a Well-Founded Solution to the Generality Problem? Philosophical Studies:1-10.score: 24.0
    The generality problem is perhaps the most notorious problem for process reliabilism. Several recent responses to the generality problem have claimed that the problem has been unfairly leveled against reliabilists. In particular, these responses have claimed that the generality problem is either (i) just as much of a problem for evidentialists, or (ii) if it is not, then a parallel solution is available to reliabilists. Along these lines, Juan Comesaña has recently proposed solution to the generality (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Kosta Došen & Zoran Petrić (2003). Generality of Proofs and its Brauerian Representation. Journal of Symbolic Logic 68 (3):740-750.score: 24.0
    The generality of a derivation is an equivalence relation on the set of occurrences of variables in its premises and conclusion such that two occurrences of the same variable are in this relation if and only if they must remain occurrences of the same variable in every generalization of the derivation. The variables in question are propositional or of another type. A generalization of the derivation consists in diversifying variables without changing the rules of inference. This paper examines in (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Gonçalo Santos (2010). A Not So Fine Version of Generality Relativism. Theoria 25 (2):149-161.score: 24.0
    The generality relativist has been accused of holding a self-defeating thesis. Kit Fine proposed a modal version of generality relativism that tries to resist this claim. We discuss his proposal and argue that one of its formulations is self-defeating.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. I. Grattan-Guinness (2011). Omnipresence, Multipresence and Ubiquity: Kinds of Generality in and Around Mathematics and Logics. [REVIEW] Logica Universalis 5 (1):21-73.score: 24.0
    A prized property of theories of all kinds is that of generality, of applicability or least relevance to a wide range of circumstances and situations. The purpose of this article is to present a pair of distinctions that suggest that three kinds of generality are to be found in mathematics and logics, not only at some particular period but especially in developments that take place over time: ‘omnipresent’ and ‘multipresent’ theories, and ‘ubiquitous’ notions that form dependent parts, or (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Guido Melchior (2014). A Generality Problem for Bootstrapping and Sensitivity. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 14 (40):31-47.score: 24.0
    Vogel argues that sensitivity accounts of knowledge are implausible because they entail that we cannot have any higher-level knowledge that our beliefs are true, not false. Becker and Salerno object that Vogel is mistaken because he does not formalize higher-level beliefs adequately. They claim that if formalized correctly, higher-level beliefs are sensitive, and can therefore constitute knowledge. However, these accounts do not consider the belief-forming method as sensitivity accounts require. If we take bootstrapping as the belief-forming method, as the discussed (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Grant R. Gillett (1987). The Generality Constraint and Conscious Thought. Analysis 47 (January):20-24.score: 21.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Bernard Molyneux (2007). Primeness, Internalism and Explanatory Generality. Philosophical Studies 135 (2):255 - 277.score: 21.0
    Williamson (2000) [Knowledge and its Limits, Oxford: Oxford University Press] argues that attempts to substitute narrow mental states or narrow/environmental composites for broad and factive mental states will result in poorer explanations of behavior. I resist Williamson.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Ronald Neman & Theodore R. Dixon (1970). Stimulus Generality in Word Association Sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology 83 (3p1):506.score: 21.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. L. Postman & V. L. Senders (1946). Incidental Learning and Generality of Set. Journal of Experimental Psychology 36 (2):153.score: 21.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Michael E. Dawson & Fred W. Dunn (1973). Situational Generality of Conditioning Phenomena: Stimulus Generalization and Component Interaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology 98 (2):440.score: 21.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. L. B. Heathers (1942). Factors Producing Generality in the Level of Aspiration. Journal of Experimental Psychology 30 (5):392.score: 21.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Gustav Levine & Richard Loesch (1967). Generality of Response Intensity Following Nonreinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology 75 (1):97.score: 21.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Vito Modigliani (1971). On the Conservation of Simple Concepts: Generality of the Affirmation Rule. Journal of Experimental Psychology 87 (2):234.score: 21.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Nathan Salmon (2012). Generality. Philosophical Studies 161 (3):471-481.score: 18.0
    A distinction is drawn among predicates, open sentences (or open formulas), and general terms, including general-term phrases. Attaching a copula, perhaps together with an article, to a general term yields a predicate. Predicates can also be obtained through lambda-abstraction on an open sentence. The issue of designation and semantic content for each type of general expression is investigated. It is argued that the designatum of a general term is a universal, e.g., a kind, whereas the designatum of a predicate is (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Imogen Dickie (2010). The Generality of Particular Thought. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (240):508-531.score: 18.0
    This paper is about the claim that, necessarily, a subject who can think that a is F must also have the capacities to think that a is G, a is H, a is I, and so on (for some reasonable range of G, H, I), and that b is F, c is F, d is F, and so on (for some reasonable range of b, c, d). I set out, and raise objections to, two arguments for a strong version of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Wim J. Van Der Steen (1995). Egoism and Altruism in Ethics: Dispensing with Spurious Generality. [REVIEW] Journal of Value Inquiry 29 (1):31-44.score: 18.0
    Is human behavior exclusively motivated by self-interest? Common sense indicates that we should flatly deny this, or so it seems to me. Yet the doctrine of universal self-interest, psychological egoism for short, has gained the support of many researchers in science. Common sense also seems to allow the rejection of ethical egoism, the doctrine that human behavior should be motivated exclusively by self-interest. It appears to be at variance with widely endorsed moralities. Yet it is a perennial subject of research (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Timothy Williamson (2007). Absolute Identity and Absolute Generality. In Gabriel Uzquiano & Agustin Rayo (eds.), Absolute Generality. OUP. 369--89.score: 18.0
    In conversations between native speakers, words such as ‘same’ and ‘identical’ do not usually cause much difficulty. We take it for granted that others use them with the same sense as we do. If it is unclear whether numerical or qualitative identity is intended, a brief gloss such as ‘one thing not two’ for the former or ‘exactly alike’ for the latter removes the unclarity. In this paper, numerical identity is intended. A particularly conscientious and logically aware speaker might explain (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Joshua C. Thurow (2009). The a Priori Defended: A Defense of the Generality Argument. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 146 (2):273 - 289.score: 18.0
    One of Laurence BonJour’s main arguments for the existence of the a priori is an argument that a priori justification is indispensable for making inferences from experience to conclusions that go beyond experience. This argument has recently come under heavy fire from Albert Casullo, who has dubbed BonJour’s argument, “The Generality Argument.” In this paper I (i) defend the Generality Argument against Casullo’s criticisms, and (ii) develop a new, more plausible, version of the Generality Argument in response (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Christopher Campbell (2014). Categorial Indeterminacy, Generality and Logical Form in Wittgenstein's Tractatus. European Journal of Philosophy 22 (1):138-158.score: 18.0
    Many commentators have attempted to say, more clearly than Wittgenstein did in his Tractatus logico-philosophicus, what sort of things the ‘simple objects’ spoken of in that book are. A minority approach, but in my view the correct one, is to reject all such attempts as misplaced. The Tractarian notion of an object is categorially indeterminate: in contrast with both Frege's and Russell's practice, it is not the logician's task to give a specific categorial account of the internal structure of elementary (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Brendan S. Gillon (1990). Ambiguity, Generality, and Indeterminacy: Tests and Definitions. [REVIEW] Synthese 85 (3):391 - 416.score: 18.0
    The problem addressed is that of finding a sound characterization of ambiguity. Two kinds of characterizations are distinguished: tests and definitions. Various definitions of ambiguity are critically examined and contrasted with definitions of generality and indeterminacy, concepts with which ambiguity is sometimes confused. One definition of ambiguity is defended as being more theoretically adequate than others which have been suggested by both philosophers and linguists. It is also shown how this definition of ambiguity obviates a problem thought to be (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Agustín Rayo & Gabriel Uzquiano (eds.) (2006). Absolute Generality. Oxford University Press.score: 18.0
    The problem of absolute generality has attracted much attention in recent philosophy. Agustin Rayo and Gabriel Uzquiano have assembled a distinguished team of contributors to write new essays on the topic. They investigate the question of whether it is possible to attain absolute generality in thought and language and the ramifications of this question in the philosophy of logic and mathematics.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Don Loeb (1996). Generality and Moral Justification. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 56 (1):79-96.score: 18.0
    Demands for generality sometimes exert a powerful influence on our thinking, pressing us to treat more general moral positions, such as consequentialism, as superior to more specific ones, like those which incorporate agent-centered restrictions or prerogatives. I articulate both foundationalist and coherentist versions of the demands for generality and argue that we can best understand these demands in terms of a certain underlying metaphysical commitment. I consider and reject various arguments which might be offered in support of this (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. James Beebe (2004). The Generality Problem, Statistical Relevance and the Tri-Level Hypothesis. Noûs 38 (1):177 - 195.score: 18.0
    Proposes a solution to the Generality Problem for reliabilism that is based upon the modeling of cognitive processes in the cognitive sciences.
    No categories
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Klemens Kappel (2006). A Diagnosis and Resolution to the Generality Problem. Philosophical Studies 127 (3):525 - 560.score: 18.0
    The purpose of this paper is to offer a diagnosis and a resolution to generality problem. I state the generality problem and suggest a distinction between criteria of relevance and what I call a theory of determination. The generality problem may concern either of these. While plausible criteria of relevance would be convenient for the externalist, he does not need them. I discuss various theories of determination, and argue that no existing theory of determination is plausible. This (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Panayot Butchvarov, Bergmann and Wittgenstein on Generality.score: 18.0
    General statements have been the chief subject matter of logic since Aristotle’s syllogistic. They have also been a fundamental concern of metaphysics, though only since Frege invented modern quantification theory. Indeed, logicians and even metaphysicians seldom ask what, if anything, general statements correspond to in the world. But Frege and Russell did, and the question became a major theme in Wittgenstein’s early (pre-1929) and Gustav Bergmann’s later (post- 1959) works. All four were aware that, as Bergmann put it in his (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Krzysztof Guczalski (2005). Expressive Meaning in Music: Generality Versus Particularity. British Journal of Aesthetics 45 (4):342-367.score: 18.0
    The dilemma referred to in the title occurs in many contexts concerned with expressive meaning in art, and especially music, which suggests that the issue it raises will be central to any complete theory of musical expressiveness. One notable attempt to resolve the paradox of simultaneous generality and particularity in music is in Aaron Ridley's book Music, Value and the Passions. I show why I consider his account unsatisfactory and then propose my own resolution of the paradox. It takes (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Elisabeth Camp (2004). The Generality Constraint and Categorial Restrictions. Philosophical Quarterly 54 (215):209–231.score: 18.0
    We should not admit categorial restrictions on the significance of syntactically well formed strings. Syntactically well formed but semantically absurd strings, such as ‘Life’s but a walking shadow’ and ‘Caesar is a prime number’, can express thoughts; and competent thinkers both are able to grasp these and ought to be able to. Gareth Evans’ generality constraint, though Evans himself restricted it, should be viewed as a fully general constraint on concept possession and propositional thought. For (a) even well formed (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Carole J. Lee (2007). The Representation of Judgment Heuristics and the Generality Problem. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Cognitive Science Society:1211-6.score: 18.0
    In his debates with Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, Gerd Gigerenzer puts forward a stricter standard for the proper representation of judgment heuristics. I argue that Gigerenzer’s stricter standard contributes to naturalized epistemology in two ways. First, Gigerenzer’s standard can be used to winnow away cognitive processes that are inappropriately characterized and should not be used in the epistemic evaluation of belief. Second, Gigerenzer’s critique helps to recast the generality problem in naturalized epistemology and cognitive psychology as the methodological (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Julien Dutant & Erik J. Olsson (2013). Is There a Statistical Solution to the Generality Problem? Erkenntnis 78 (6):1347-1365.score: 18.0
    This article is concerned with a statistical proposal due to James R. Beebe for how to solve the generality problem for process reliabilism. The proposal is highlighted by Alvin I. Goldman as an interesting candidate solution. However, Goldman raises the worry that the proposal may not always yield a determinate result. We address this worry by proving a dilemma: either the statistical approach does not yield a determinate result or it leads to trivialization, i.e. reliability collapses into truth (and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. James Owen Weatherall (2013). The Scope and Generality of Bell's Theorem. Foundations of Physics 43 (9):1153-1169.score: 18.0
    I present what might seem to be a local, deterministic model of the EPR-Bohm experiment, inspired by recent work by Joy Christian, that appears at first blush to be in tension with Bell-type theorems. I argue that the model ultimately fails to do what a hidden variable theory needs to do, but that it is interesting nonetheless because the way it fails helps clarify the scope and generality of Bell-type theorems. I formulate and prove a minor proposition that makes (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Kosta Došen (2003). Identity of Proofs Based on Normalization and Generality. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 9 (4):477-503.score: 18.0
    Some thirty years ago, two proposals were made concerning criteria for identity of proofs. Prawitz proposed to analyze identity of proofs in terms of the equivalence relation based on reduction to normal form in natural deduction. Lambek worked on a normalization proposal analogous to Prawitz's, based on reduction to cut-free form in sequent systems, but he also suggested understanding identity of proofs in terms of an equivalence relation based on generality, two derivations having the same generality if after (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Laura Duhau (2009). Conceptuality and Generality: A Criticism of an Argument for Content Dualism. Crítica 41 (123):39-63.score: 18.0
    In this paper I discuss Heck's (2007) new argument for content dualism. This argument is based on the claim that conceptual states, but not perceptual states, meet Evans's Generality Constraint. Heck argues that this claim, together with the idea that the kind of content we should attribute to a mental state depends on which generalizations the state satisfies, implies that conceptual states and perceptual states have different kinds of contents. I argue, however, that it is unlikely that there is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. S. Gandon (2013). Variable, Structure, and Restricted Generality. Philosophia Mathematica 21 (2):200-219.score: 18.0
    From 1905–1908 onward, Russell thought that his new ‘substitutional theory’ provided him with the right framework to resolve the set-theoretic paradoxes. Even if he did not finally retain this resolution, the substitutional strategy was instrumental in the development of his thought. The aim of this paper is not historical, however. It is to show that Russell's substitutional insight can shed new light on current issues in philosophy of mathematics. After having briefly expounded Russell's key notion of a ‘structured variable’, I (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Sören Stenlund (2002). The Craving for Generality. Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 58 (3):569 - 580.score: 18.0
    This paper deals with Wittgenstein's statement that our "craving for generality" is a main source of confusion in philosophy. It is argued that difficulties connected with this tendency also affect most attempts to explain or elaborate Wittgenstein's philosophical thinking, since most commentaries elucidate his thinking in general terms, in the notions and classificatory apparatus of some prevalent vocabulary of professional philosophy. It is argued that this craving for generality is closely tied up with another tendency of traditional philosophy, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Brian Weatherson, The Temporal Generality Problem.score: 18.0
    The generality problem is a well-known problem for process reliabilist theories of justification. Here’s how the problem usually gets started. In the first instance, token processes of belief formation are not themselves reliable or unreliable. Rather, it is types of processes of belief formation that are reliable or unreliable. But any token process is an instance of many different types. And these types may differ in reliability.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Michael Scanlan (1995). Wittgenstein, Truth-Functions, and Generality. Journal of Philosophical Research 20:175-193.score: 18.0
    Although it is eommon to attribute to Wittgenstein in the Tractatus a treatment of general propositions as equivalent to eonjunctions and disjunctions of instance propositions, the evidence for this is not perfeetly clear. This article considers Wittgenstein’s comments in 5.521, which can be read as rejecting such a treatment. It argues that properly situating the Tractatus historically allows for a revised reading of 5.521 and other parts of the Tractatus relevant to Wittgenstein’s theory of generality. The result is that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Jeffrey C. Schank (2001). Dimensions of Modelling: Generality and Integrativeness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1075-1076.score: 18.0
    Webb has articulated a clear, multi-dimensional framework for discussing simulation models and modelling strategies. This framework will likely co-evolve with modelling. As such, it will be important to continue to clarify these dimensions and perhaps add to them. I discuss the dimension of generality and suggest that a dimension of integrativeness may also be needed.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Miriam Solomon (1995). Naturalism and Generality. Philosophical Psychology 8 (4):353 – 363.score: 18.0
    Naturalistic epistemologists frequently assume that their aim is to identify generalities (i.e. general laws) about the effectiveness of particular reasoning processes and methods. This paper argues that the search for this kind of generality fails. Work that has been done thus far to identify generalities (e.g. by Goldman, Kitcher and Thagard) overlooks both the complexity of reasoning and the relativity of assessments to particular contexts (domain, stage and goal of inquiry). Examples of human reasoning which show both complexity and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Eduardo Alejandro Barrio (2007). Modelos, Autoaplicación Y Máxima Generalidad (Models, Self-Application and Absolute Generality). Theoria 22 (2):133-152.score: 18.0
    En este artículo, me propongo exponer algunas dificultades relacionadas con la posibilidad de que la Teoría de Modelos pueda constituirse en una Teoría General de la Interpretación. Específicamente la idea que sostengo es que lo que nos muestra la Paradoja de Orayen es que las interpretaciones no pueden ser ni conjuntos ni objetos. Por eso, una elucidación del concepto intuitivo de interpretación, que apele a este tipo de entidades, está condenada al fracaso. De manera secundaria, muestro que no hay algún (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Sasan Haghighi, The Role of Philosophy in Cognitive Science: Normativity, Generality, Mechanistic Explanation. OZSW 2013 Rotterdam.score: 18.0
    ID: 89 / Parallel 4k: 2 Single paper Topics: Philosophy of mind, Philosophy of science Keywords: Cognitive Science, Cognitive Neuroscience, Mechanistic explanations, Reductionism, Normativity, Generality, Emerging School of Philosophers of Science. The role of philosophy in cognitive science: mechanistic explanations, normativity, generality Mohammadreza Haghighi Fard Leiden University, Netherlands, The; haghighiphil@aol.com Introduction -/- Cognitive science, as an interdisciplinary research endeavour, seeks to explain mental activities such as reasoning, remembering, language use, and problem solving, and the explanations it advances commonly (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. James Russell (1988). Cognisance and Cognitive Science. Part One: The Generality Constraint. Philosophical Psychology 1 (2):235 – 258.score: 18.0
    I distinguish between being cognisant and being able to perform intelligent operations. The former, but not the latter, minimally involves the capacity to make adequate judgements about one's relation to objects in the environment. The referential nature of cognisance entails that the mental states of cognisant systems must be inter-related holistically, such that an individual thought becomes possible because of its relation to a system of potential thoughts. I use Gareth Evans' 'Generality Constraint' as a means of describing how (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Felice L. Bedford (2001). Generality, Mathematical Elegance, and Evolution of Numerical/Object Identity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):654-655.score: 18.0
    Object identity, the apprehension that two glimpses refer to the same object, is offered as an example of combining generality, mathematics, and evolution. We argue that it applies to glimpses in time (apparent motion), modality (ventriloquism), and space (Gestalt grouping); that it has a mathematically elegant solution of nested geometries (Euclidean, Similarity, Affine, Projective, Topology); and that it is evolutionarily sound despite our Euclidean world. [Shepard].
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Wim J. Steen & Bert Musschenga (1992). The Issue of Generality in Ethics. Journal of Value Inquiry 26 (4):511-524.score: 18.0
    Does ethics have adequate general theories? Our analysis shows that this question does not have a straightforward answer since the key terms are ambiguous. So we should not concentrate on the answer but on the question itself. “Ethics” stands for many things, but we let that pass. “Adequate” may refer to varied arrays of methodological principles which are seldom fully articulated in ethics. “General” is a notion with at least three meanings. Different kinds of generality may be at cross-purposes, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000