Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Fodor: Signal language of the brain for internal processing - PutnamVs. Mentalese explains nothing, shifts the problem. SearleVs. Regress of homunculi. - Rorty's solution is a hierarchy of dumber homunculi.
 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data
Fodor, Jerry
 
Books on Amazon
Mentalese Rorty I 269 ff
Rorty: Fodor s image of the internal representations has nothing to do with our mirror of nature that we have accepted. What is crucial is that with regard to Fodor s "Language of thought" the skeptical question of "how exactly do the internal representations represent the reality" cannot be asked! There is no gap.
Newen/Schrenk I 132
Mentalese/language of thought/thought language/Fodor/Newen/Schrenk: Thesis: thinking takes place with mental representations. - E.g. fuel gauge, causal connection. - Mentalese: as rich as natural language, but purely internal, symbolic, purely syntactic symbol manipulation - only in connection with propositional attitude - VsFodor: a) regress.
I 133
b) the supporters of the thesis of the prevalence of thought cannot explain the normativity of thinking with the help of social institutions such as the language - c) there are also beliefs without representation: E.g. chess computers: -brute force- then: -I should the queen out of the game early.

F/L
J. Fodor/E. Lepore
Holism Cambridge USA Oxford UK 1992

Ro I
R. Rorty
Der Spiegel der Natur Frankfurt 1997

Ro II
R. Rorty
Philosophie & die Zukunft Frankfurt 2000

Ro III
R. Rorty
Kontingenz, Ironie und Solidarität Frankfurt 1992

Ro IV
R. Rorty
Eine Kultur ohne Zentrum Stuttgart 1993

Ro V
R. Rorty
Solidarität oder Objektivität? Stuttgart 1998

Ro VI
R. Rorty
Wahrheit und Fortschritt Frankfurt 2000


> Counter arguments against Fodor
> Counter arguments in relation to Mentalese



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX file
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-04-26