Lexicon of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
I 115f
Behaviorism/VsRyle/Rorty:
1) It is impossible to give a description of behavioral dispositions which does not consist in an infinitely long list. >Lists.
2) "Necessity", of whatever kind, does not depend on "meaning" here, but simply reflects the fact that we usually characterize behavior in a certain way. Necessity as little a "linguistic" or "conceptual" one as the necessary link between the redness of the stove and the fire in the stove. ((s) behavior depends on description.)
3) It is merely a philosophical paradox that only comes to the mind of someone who is chased by instrumentalist or verificationist dogmas, and is constantly eager to reduce any non-observable to the observable to avoid any risk to believe in something unreal.
>Unobservables, >Theoretical entities.
I 115
Rorty: all three are justified, yet you get the feeling that the behaviorism is on to something right. But you will not say one day, "Okay, no feelings, i.e. no mental states, i.e. no people".
>Sensation, >Mental states, >Person.
I 116
Behaviorism: important point: he makes it clear that the question of the harder philosophers: "Are there mental states or are there no mental states?" are thus more pointless the more often they are asked.
RortyVsRyle: he should have said that >incorrigibility is simply a function of the practice of justification. It was wrong to speak of a necessary and sufficient condition for the attribution of feelings.

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.