In defence of narrow mindedness

Mind and Language 14 (2):177-94 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Externalism about the mind holds that the explanation of our representational capacities requires appeal to mental states that are individuated by reference to features of the environment. Externalists claim that ‘narrow’ taxonomies cannot account for important features of psychological explanation. I argue that this claim is false, and offer a general argument for preferring narrow taxonomies in psychology

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 104,218

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Nativism and the Theory of Content.David Pitt - 2000 - ProtoSociology 14:222-239.
There is no viable notion of narrow content.Sarah Sawyer - 2007 - In Brian P. McLaughlin & Jonathan Cohen, Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Mind. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 20-34.
How narrow is narrow content?François Recanati - 1994 - Dialectica 48 (3-4):209-29.
Internalism and the explanatory role of narrow content.Sam Baird - 2015 - Dissertation, University of Edinburgh
Narrow Content - Chapter 1.Juhani Yli-Vakkuri & John Hawthorne - 2018 - In Juhani Yli-Vakkuri & John Hawthorne, Narrow Content. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Primeness, internalism and explanatory generality.Bernard Molyneux - 2007 - Philosophical Studies 135 (2):255 - 277.
The nature of content: a critique of Yli-Vakkuri and Hawthorne.Sarah Sawyer - forthcoming - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
181 (#138,307)

6 months
12 (#278,490)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Frances Egan
Rutgers - New Brunswick