Conceivability and possibility: some dilemmas for Humeans

Synthese 195 (6):2697-2715 (2018)

Authors
Franz Berto
University of St. Andrews
Abstract
The Humean view that conceivability entails possibility can be criticized via input from cognitive psychology. A mainstream view here has it that there are two candidate codings for mental representations (one of them being, according to some, reducible to the other): the linguistic and the pictorial, the difference between the two consisting in the degree of arbitrariness of the representation relation. If the conceivability of P at issue for Humeans involves the having of a linguistic mental representation, then it is easy to show that we can conceive the impossible, for impossibilities can be represented by meaningful bits of language. If the conceivability of P amounts to the pictorial imaginability of a situation verifying P, then the question is whether the imagination at issue works purely qualitatively, that is, only by phenomenological resemblance with the imagined scenario. If so, the range of situations imaginable in this way is too limited to have a significant role in modal epistemology. If not, imagination will involve some arbitrary labeling component, which turns out to be sufficient for imagining the impossible. And if the relevant imagination is neither linguistic nor pictorial, Humeans will appear to resort to some representational magic, until they come up with a theory of a ‘third code’ for mental representations.
Keywords Conceivability and possibility  Imagination  Modal epistemology  Mental representation  Mental imagery
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11229-017-1346-7
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

References found in this work BETA

Image and Mind.Stephen M. Kosslyn - 1980 - Harvard University Press.
Does Conceivability Entail Possibility.David Chalmers - 2002 - In Tamar Szabo Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Conceivability and Possibility. Oxford University Press. pp. 145--200.

View all 78 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Aboutness in Imagination.Franz Berto - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (8):1871-1886.
Impossible Worlds.Franz Berto & Mark Jago - 2019 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Conceivability, Imagination and Modal Knowledge.M. Oreste Fiocco - 2007 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (2):364–380.
Conceivability and Possibility.Tamar Szabo Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.) - 2002 - Oxford University Press.
Introduction: Conceivability and Possibility.Tamar Szabó Gendler & John Hawthorne - 2002 - In T. Szabó Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Conceivability and Possibility. Oxford University Press. pp. 1--70.
Conceivability and Defeasible Modal Justification.Heimir Geirsson - 2005 - Philosophical Studies 122 (3):279-304.
Meta-Conceivability.Phil Corkum - 2012 - Essays in Philosophy 13 (1):12.
Does Conceivability Entail Possibility.David Chalmers - 2002 - In Tamar Szabo Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Conceivability and Possibility. Oxford University Press. pp. 145--200.
Imagination and Modal Epistemology.Peter Kung - 2002 - Dissertation, New York University
Imagery and Imagination.Amy Kind - 2005 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Conceivability and Modal Knowledge.Rene Woudenberg - 2006 - Metaphilosophy 37 (2):210-221.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-02-25

Total views
168 ( #45,307 of 2,271,259 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
29 ( #28,872 of 2,271,259 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature