Rorty VI 27
Rorty: "Intentional stance"/intentional position/Dennett: The "intentional stance" is made possible through the detection of a Davidsonian pattern. The pattern of this rationality is the same as that of the truth. Neither language without rationality, nor one of them without truth.
>
Rationality, >
Language and Thought, >
Truth/Davidson.
- - -
Dennett I 316f
SearleVsDennett: This is only an "as-if intentionality".
Intentionality/DennettVsSearle: But you have to start somewhere (if you want to avoid metaphysics). The first step in the right direction is hardly recognizable as a step towards meaning.
Def intentional stance/Dennett: An attempt to determine what the designer (or Mother Nature) had in mind.
- - -
Dennett II 46
It often allows large jumps in the conclusions without the ignorance of the underlying physics disturbing them.
E.g. Antikythera mechanism: The fact that it was a planetarium results from the fact that it was a good planetarium!
E.g. Martians wonder why there is so much excess capacity in the computer: Reason: chips became so cheap. This is a historical explanation, but it emanates from the intentional stance.
E.g. Could archaeopteryx fly? They are not sure, but found that his claws were ideal for sitting on tree branches! So how did it get up there ...?
- - -
I 321
Def design standpoint/Dennett: e.g. an alarm clock is (as opposed to stone) a designed object and is accessible to a sophisticated kind of predictions. (According to the design standpoint). When I press the buttons, something will happen a few hours later.
But I do not need to know the laws of physics for that.
Intentional stance/Dennett: E.g. chess computer. Nothing in the laws of physics forces the chess computer to make the next move, but nothing in its design either. >Cf. >
Chess programs.
- - -
Brandom I 109
Intention/Intentionality/Dennett: stance-stance: asserts that one cannot distinguish whether something really is an intentional system and whether it is being treated as such appropriately.
- - -
I 591ff
E.g. freezing/Dennett: E.g. assuming you have yourself frozen in order to be unfrozen in the 25th century. Upon whom can you rely? The example imitates the whole evolution.
Dennett I 592ff
Intentionality/Real/Derived/Dennett: E.g. freezing: the robot that takes care of you must be able to act independently. - It must believe in reward, but develops self-interest. -
Question: is this kind of intentionality still derived? - If so, then our own is also merely derived - but that s splitting hairs.
Important Argument: we ourselves are only those survival machines for our genes.
I 596
Intentionality/SearleVsDennett: No machine, no vending machine either has intentionality.
Freezing/DennettVsSearle: At some point intentionality is no longer derived, but real! >
As-if-intentionality/Searle.
