Problems with principle P

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (3):261-77 (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In Psychosemantics Fodor presents three arguments for preferring the language of thought over mere intentional realism - arguments for the conclusion that intentional causes of behavior have constituent structure. The first of these, relying on the methodological 'Principle P', is considered in detail here and is found wanting. This principle does not prefer the language of thought to those very connectionist systems which Fodor criticizes; and it rests on dubious theoretical and empirical assumptions

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,880

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Problems with Principle P.Hugh Caplin - 1997 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (3):261-277.
Propositional Attitudes and the Language of Thought.Frances Egan - 1991 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21 (3):379 - 388.
Connectionism and the language of thought.Mark Rowlands - 1994 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45 (2):485-503.
Is even thought compositional?Lenny Clapp - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 157 (2):299-322.
Cognition, Systematicity and Nomic Necessity.Robert F. Hadley - 1997 - Mind and Language 12 (2):137-153.
Communication and strong compositionality.Peter Pagin - 2003 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 32 (3):287-322.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
35 (#655,197)

6 months
5 (#1,080,408)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references