Manipulating emotion: The best evidence for non-cognitivism in the light of proper function

Analysis 67 (3):230–237 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I argue two things. One is that conceptual considerations about the nature and identification of psychological systems suggest that these recent empirical findings, being based on manipulated conditions, are not relevant to the issue of what emotions are and thus do not underwrite noncognitivism. The other is that these same considerations lend support to the idea that paradigm emotions, including the purported noncognitive basic emotions, are in fact cognitive. Central to these claims is the concept of proper function, particularly as laid out by Ruth Millikan, which has received insufficient attention in work on the nature of emotion.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 105,492

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

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
144 (#163,998)

6 months
22 (#142,758)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Charles Starkey
Clemson University

Citations of this work

Insights and Blindspots of the Cognitivist Theory of Emotions.Andrea Scarantino - 2010 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (4):729-768.
Current Emotion Research in Philosophy.Paul E. Griffiths - 2013 - Emotion Review 5 (2):215-222.
Emotion and Full Understanding.Charles Starkey - 2008 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 11 (4):425-454.

Add more citations