Lexicon of Arguments

 

I 104
Thinking/Language/Avramides: thesis: beings without language can have thoughts.
>Thinking without language, >Language and thought, >World/Thinking, >Thoughts.
I 113
Thinking without Language/Avramides: then language is a mere vehicle for communication.
>Communication.
Schiffer: the Gricean concepts allow for that, but contingently there are no such beings.
>Communication/Schiffer.
I 115
Thinking without Language/Reductionism/Avramides: there is only a problem for reductionism if the assertion is conceptually related to the semantic and psychological concepts - (and is not simply empirical).
>Reductionism.
Davidson: psychological concepts cannot be instantiated without semantic ones - SchifferVsDavidson: ditto, but they can be grasped without them!
Avramides: then the mere intuition that there can be no thinking without language is not sufficient for an antireductionism.
Antireductionism: must assert that the assertion of the reductionist a deep epistemic dependence is unfounded.
>Terminology/Arvramides.
I 142f
DummettVsIdealism/DummettVsLocke: Locke proposes a wrong code concept of language for ideas.
Significance is not explained by thoughts. - Where the thoughts, in turn, are without reference to language - this does not explain how thoughts themselves come to significance. - Then mother tongue would be like a foreign language.
>Code, >John Locke, >Meaning, cf. >Language of thought.
Solution/Dummett: grasp = use: E.g. thw word "square" sorts out square things. -Then no representations are needed to connect sentences with thoughts.
>Representation.
It is about understanding instead of association.
>Association, >Understanding.
AvramidesVsDummett: but this approach allows no thinking without language.
I 15
Thinking/Dummett: thinking can only be investigated through language (not through behavior). AvramidesVsDummett: also through behavior.
>Behavior.