The limits of spectatorial folk psychology

Mind and Language 19 (5):548-73 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

  It is almost universally agreed that the main business of commonsense psychology is that of providing generally reliable predictions and explanations of the actions of others. In line with this, it is also generally assumed that we are normally at theoretical remove from others such that we are always ascribing causally efficacious mental states to them for the purpose of prediction, explanation and control. Building on the work of those who regard our primary intersubjective interactions as a form of 'embodied practice', I defend a secondpersonal approach in this paper

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,419

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

Is folk psychology different?Jonathan Knowles - 2002 - Erkenntnis 57 (2):199-230.
The Ethical Dimension of Folk Psychology?Karsten R. Stueber - 2009 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 52 (5):532-547.
Folk psychology as a theory.Ian Martin Ravenscroft - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Two contrasts: Folk craft vs folk science and belief vs opinion.Daniel C. Dennett - 1991 - In John D. Greenwood (ed.), The Future of Folk Psychology. Cambridge University Press. pp. 135--148.
"Folk psychology" is not folk psychology.Matthew Ratcliffe - 2006 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 5 (1):31-52.
Folk psychology and mental simulation.Martin Davies & Tony Stone - 1998 - In Anthony O'Hear (ed.), Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 53-82.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
625 (#15,092)

6 months
1 (#452,962)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?