Are Concepts Creatures of Darkness?

Analytic Philosophy 54 (2):277-292 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In Our Knowledge of the Internal World, Robert Stalnaker presents a sophisticated new defense of a radically externalist and contextualist approach to mental content. Stalnaker holds that unstructured propositions—sets of possible worlds—can provide a complete account of mental content, including Fregean cognitive significance phenomena. So there is no theoretical job for concepts to fulfill. Stalnaker sees concepts as ‘creatures of darkness’ that encourage theoretical confusion. Concepts are a vestige of the mistaken internalist picture of the mind: internal states that are supposed to ensure transparent access to the objects, kinds, or properties our thoughts represent. I argue there are better reasons for positing concepts—reasons that are independent of the internalist project.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,122

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-06-09

Downloads
152 (#118,812)

6 months
11 (#170,645)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Laura Schroeter
University of Melbourne

References found in this work

Individualism and the mental.Tyler Burge - 1979 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 4 (1):73-122.
A puzzle about belief.Saul A. Kripke - 1979 - In A. Margalit (ed.), Meaning and Use. Reidel. pp. 239--83.
Content preservation.Tyler Burge - 1993 - Philosophical Review 102 (4):457-488.
Reference and Reflexivity.John Perry - 2001 - Stanford, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Inf.
Individualism and self-knowledge.Tyler Burge - 1988 - Journal of Philosophy 85 (November):649-63.

View all 15 references / Add more references