scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers in "Philosophical Investigations in 2009"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper reviewed the grounds for relativist interpretations of Wittgenstein's later thought, especially in On Certainty, and found them wanting. But they did not support any form of relativism, let it be factual or virtual.
Abstract: The paper reviews the grounds for relativist interpretations of Wittgenstein's later thought, especially in On Certainty. It distinguishes between factual and virtual forms of epistemic relativism and argues that, on closer inspection, Wittgenstein's notes don't support any form of relativism – let it be factual or virtual. In passing, it considers also so-called “naturalist” readings of On Certainty, which may lend support to a relativist interpretation of Wittgenstein's ideas, finds them wanting, and recommends to interpret his positive proposal in On Certainty as a form of “internal rationalism.”

37 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
Gyula Klima1
TL;DR: The authors argue that with proper understanding, Aquinas's conception of the human soul and intellect does offer a consistent alternative to the dilemma of sheer materialism and post-Cartesian dualism.
Abstract: Contemporary philosophers tend to become interested in Aquinas’s conception of the mind when they perceive it as possibly offering a promising alternative between “the Scylla of materialism and the Charybdis of dualism”. They tend to become disillusioned, however, when they run into the problem of the apparent inconsistency in Aquinas’s conception. Furthermore, if they manage somehow to get over that apparent inconsistency, they find the support for the necessity of Aquinas’s view rather weak. 1 In this paper I will address both of these problems. I will first argue that with the proper understanding, Aquinas’s conception of the human soul and intellect does offer a consistent alternative to the dilemma of sheer materialism and postCartesian dualism. Furthermore, I will also argue that in their own theoretical context, Aquinas’ arguments for the materiality of the human soul and immateriality of the intellect provide a strong justification of his position. However, that theoretical context is rather “alien” to anything we are familiar with in contemporary philosophy. The conclusion of the paper will point in the direction of what can and needs to be done to render Aquinas’s position more palatable to contemporary philosophers.

19 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, it is argued that it is the epithelial body that enters into the formation of our sense of self and that largely bears the burden of personal identity as well as playing the key role in grounding our psychological ascriptions.
Abstract: My aim in this paper is to destabilise the brain-is-self thesis, something that is now regarded in some quarters as philosophical commonsense. My contention is that it is the epithelial body that enters into the formation of our sense of self and that largely bears the burden of personal identity as well as playing the key role in grounding our psychological ascriptions. Lacking any sensorimotor or social presence of its own, the brain by itself cannot "underlie" selfhood, but only as part of the whole living human being. If the minded individual is embodied, this must mean more than being embrained.

12 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
Timothy Chappell1
TL;DR: The authors argue that moral theory typically fails to ground any adequate ethical outlook and that it is the notion of an ethical outlook that philosophical ethicists should pursue, not the unfruitful and distorting notion of a moral theory.
Abstract: I develop an anti-theory view of ethics. Moral theory (Kantian, utilitarian, virtue ethical, etc.) is the dominant approach to ethics among academic philosophers. But moral theory's hunt for a single Master Factor (utility, universalisability, virtue ...) is implausibly systematising and reductionist. Perhaps scientism drives the approach? But good science always insists on respect for the data, even messy data: I criticise Singer's remarks on infanticide as a clear instance of moral theory failing to respect the data of moral perceptions and moral intuitions. Moral theory also fails to provide a coherent basis for real-world motivation, justification, explanation, and prediction of good and bad, right and wrong. Consider for instance the marginal place of love in moral theory, compared with its central place in people's actual ethical outlooks and decision making. Hence, moral theory typically fails to ground any adequate ethical outlook. I propose that it is the notion of an ethical outlook that philosophical ethicists should pursue, not the unfruitful and distorting notion of a moral theory.

11 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The relationship between self-consciousness, Aristotelian ontology, and Cartesian duality is far closer than it has been thought to be as mentioned in this paper, and there is no valid inference either from considerations of Aristotle's hylomorphism or from the phenomenological distinction between body and living body, to the undermining of Cartesian Dualism.
Abstract: The relationship between self-consciousness, Aristotelian ontology, and Cartesian duality is far closer than it has been thought to be. There is no valid inference either from considerations of Aristotle's hylomorphism or from the phenomenological distinction between body and living body, to the undermining of Cartesian dualism. Descartes' conception of the self as both a reasoning and willing being informs his conception of personhood; a person for Descartes is an unanalysable, integrated, self-conscious and autonomous human being. The claims that Descartes introspectively encounters the self and that the Cartesian extent of inner space is self-contained are profound errors, distortions through the lenses of modern theories.

8 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present an interpretation of the thinking behind the early Wittgenstein's "general form of the proposition" and argue that a central role is played by the assumption that all domains of discourse are governed by the same laws of logic.
Abstract: The paper presents an interpretation of the thinking behind the early Wittgenstein's "general form of the proposition." It argues that a central role is played by the assumption that all domains of discourse are governed by the same laws of logic. The interpretation is presented partly through a comparison with ideas presented recently by Michael Potter and Peter Sullivan; the paper argues that the above assumption explains more of the key characteristics of the "general form of the proposition" than Potter and Sullivan suppose, including, in particular, its claim that the bases from which all other propositions are derived must be elementary propositions.

5 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors introduce distinctions between subjective and objective aspects, namely feelings of our inner psychological states versus fine-tuned objective experiences of the outer world, and they also introduce some notions from Kant's aesthetics, to get a better understanding of the interplay between feeling and meaning.
Abstract: Wittgenstein in his later years thought about experiences of meaning and aspect change. Do such experiences matter? Or would a meaning- or aspect-blind person not lose much? Moreover, is this a matter of aesthetics or epistemology? To get a better perspective on these matters, I will introduce distinctions between certain subjective and objective aspects, namely feelings of our inner psychological states versus fine-tuned objective experiences of the outer world. It seems to me that in his discussion of meaning-blindness, Wittgenstein unhappily floats between these two extremes, the subjective and the objective. I will also introduce some notions from Kant's aesthetics, to get a better understanding of the interplay between feeling and meaning. This will shed some new light on Wittgenstein's enquiry into meaning- and aspect-blindness.

4 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors argue that an internal debate within Wittgensteinian philosophy leads to issues associated rather with the later philosophy of Martin Heidegger, and they argue that this argument fails to answer the question why Zande witchcraft can find no application within our lives.
Abstract: The paper argues that an internal debate within Wittgensteinian philosophy leads to issues associated rather with the later philosophy of Martin Heidegger. Rush Rhees's identification of the limitations of the notion of a “language game” to illuminate the relation between language and reality leads to his discussion of what is involved in the “reality” of language: “anything that is said has sense-if living has sense, not otherwise.” But what is it for living to have sense? Peter Winch provides an interpretation and application of Rhees's argument in his discussion of the “reality” of Zande witchcraft and magic in “Understanding a Primitive Society”. There he argues that such sense is provided by a language game concerned with the ineradicable contingency of human life, such as (he claims) Zande witchcraft to be. I argue, however, that Winch's account fails to answer the question why Zande witchcraft can find no application within our lives. I suggest that answering this requires us to raise the question of why Zande witchcraft “fits” with their other practices but cannot with ours, a question of “sense” which cannot be answered by reference to another language game. I use Joseph Epes Brown's account of Native American cultures (in Epes Brown 2001) as an exemplification of a form of coherence that constitutes what we may call a “world”. I then discuss what is involved in this, relating this coherence to a relation to the temporal, which provides an internal connection between the senses of the “real” embodied in the different linguistic practices of these cultures. I relate this to the later Heidegger's account of the “History of Being”, of the historical worlds of Western culture and increasingly of the planet. I conclude with an indication of concerns and issues this approach raises, ones characteristic of “Continental” rather than Wittgensteinian philosophy.

3 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors argue that Wittgenstein explores the possibility of a new kind of foundationalism in On Certainty, which is a collection of first draft notes written at the end of his life.
Abstract: Bringing the views of Grayling, Moyal-Sharrock and Stroll together, I argue that in On Certainty, Wittgenstein explores the possibility of a new kind of foundationalism. Distinguishing propositional language-games from non-propositional, actional certainty, Wittgenstein investigates a foundationalism sui generis. Although he does not forthrightly state, defend, or endorse what I am characterizing as a “new kind of foundationalism,” we must bear in mind that On Certainty was a collection of first draft notes written at the end of Wittgenstein's life. The work was unprogrammatic, sometimes cryptic. Yet, his exploration into areas of knowledge, certitude and doubt suggest an identifiable direction to his thoughts.

3 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a substantial number of remarks by Wittgenstein in which he addressed cultural topics bring out the importance of the quite specific connections he saw between the philosophical problems with which he grappled and the historical cultural context in which those problems have arisen.
Abstract: My point of departure is the idea that Wittgenstein's work, especially his later work with its explicit emphasis on practices, seeks to engage a reader who is likely to come to philosophy with a certain cast of mind that includes unexamined commitments from a particular cultural context. I show how a substantial number of remarks by Wittgenstein in which he addresses cultural topics bring out the importance of the quite specific connections he saw between the philosophical problems with which he grappled and the historical cultural context in which those problems have arisen. Not only is a grasp of this aspect of his writing integral to a proper understanding of Wittgenstein as a thinker, bringing out these connections serves to put these remarks into a coherent conceptual framework. In assessing the relation of Wittgenstein's cultural concerns to his engagement with metaphysics, I show how his development of Spengler's thought is an important connecting link. Particularly important for this analysis will be my discussion of Wittgenstein's understanding and employment of the concept of a Betrachtungsform, as well as a few closely related concepts. I then offer an interpretation of what I believe to be the significance of the connection in his later thought between his philosophical activity and his views about the modern West.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that the Bayesian approach is unconvincing and that even non-basic empirical generalisations are not so confirmed if they are absurd in the light of causal background knowledge or if their instances are not also possible instances of the relevant causal claim.
Abstract: It is widely thought that Bayesian confirmation theory has provided a solution to Hempel's Paradox (the Ravens Paradox). I discuss one well-known example of this approach, by John Mackie, and argue that it is unconvincing. I then suggest an alternative solution, which shows that the Bayesian approach is altogether mistaken. Nicod's Condition should be rejected because a generalisation is not confirmed by any of its instances if it is not law-like. And even law-like non-basic empirical generalisations, which are expressions of assumed underlying causal regularities, are not so confirmed if they are absurd in the light of our causal background knowledge or if their instances are not also possible instances of the relevant causal claim.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that Wittgenstein's aim in the aspect-perception passages is to critically evaluate a specific hypothesis, which is the Gestalt psychologist Kohler's "isomorphism principle" according to which there are neural correlates of conscious perceptual experience.
Abstract: In this paper I argue that Wittgenstein's aim in the aspect-perception passages is to critically evaluate a specific hypothesis. The target hypothesis in these passages is the Gestalt psychologist Kohler's “isomorphism principle.” According to this principle, there are neural correlates of conscious perceptual experience, and these neural correlates determine the content of our perceptual experiences. Wittgenstein's argument against the isomorphism principle comprises two steps. First, he diffuses the substantiveness of the principle by undermining an important assumption that underpins this principle, namely, that there is a unitary concept of seeing. Next, Wittgenstein argues that some forms of aspect-perception involve recognitional capacities, the exercise of which is normatively constrained. The normative nature of aspect-perceiving plays a pivotal role in Wittgenstein's rejection of the isomorphism principle. Aside from the clear exegetical benefits gained from identifying the target hypothesis in the aspect-perception passages as the isomorphism principle, construing the remarks in the way suggested here is also philosophically interesting in its own right: it shows Wittgenstein engaging directly in the mind–body problem, construed as the problem of intentionality.

Journal ArticleDOI
Brian Davies1
TL;DR: This article argued that it may be premature to conclude that God is beyond reason, since natural theology is an inherently suspect notion, and argued against the critique of natural theology coming from Soren Kierkegaard, Karl Barth, and Colin Gunton.
Abstract: Classical thinkers such as St Anselm of Canterbury and St Thomas Aquinas insist that God is beyond reason because he is incomprehensible. More recent authors, including Soren Kierkegaard, Karl Barth and Colin Gunton have argued that God is beyond reason since natural theology is an inherently suspect notion. In this article, I first note ways in which all the authors just mentioned may be thought of as agreeing with each other. I then proceed to argue against the critique of natural theology coming from Kierkegaard, Barth and Gunton. My conclusion is that, in one sense, it may be premature to conclude that God is beyond reason.


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Wittgenstein this article argued that a person's intention does not have a determinate content prior to its author's judgement about whether the action conforms to the intention, an idea that is obscure.
Abstract: William Child has said that Wittgenstein is an anti-realist with respect to a person's dreams, recent thoughts that he has consciously entertained and other things. I discuss Wittgenstein's comments about these matters in order to show that they do not commit him to an anti-realist view or a realist view. He wished to discredit the idea that when a person reports his dream or his thoughts, or past intentions, the person is reading off the contents of his mind or memory. Reporting what one dreamt or recently thought is not like reporting what one has just read. The language is different, and the criterion of truth is different. The anti-realist is able to explain why the reports of thoughts, for instance, are “guaranteed” to be true (PI II, 222) by stipulating that the character and existence of the past thought is constituted by an inclination to assert that one had that past thought so the assertion could not be false. This could not be Wittgenstein's view. What does “guarantee” the truth of such an assertion is the fact that the person himself is the principle authority on what he dreamt, thought, and intended, something which “stands fast” for us. I next consider Crispin Wright's account of Wittgenstein's ideas about intentions and point out that his assumption that person always makes a judgement as to whether his action conforms to his intention is clearly false. And he is wrong in attributing to Wittgenstein the idea that an intention does not have a determinate content prior to its author's judgement about whether the action conforms to the intention, an idea that is obscure. If this were accurate, it would be a mystery why we do anything, or, at least, why our actions ever conform to our intentions.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The psychosomatic nature of human persons is best understood in terms of a dual-aspect monism, in which matter and mind are complementary aspects of a unitary being as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Physics explores a universe of wonderful order, expressed in terms of beautiful mathematical equations Mathematics itself is understood to be the exploration of a realm of noetic reality Science describes matter in terms of concepts with mind-like qualities The psychosomatic nature of human persons is best understood in terms of a dual-aspect monism, in which matter and mind are complementary aspects of a unitary being The new science of complexity theory, with its dualities of parts/whole and energy/information, offers modest resources for the speculative exploration of this idea The intrinsic unpredictabilities present in nature afford the metaphysical opportunity to consider dissipative systems as exhibiting top–down causality


Journal ArticleDOI
Timothy Chappell1
TL;DR: The article as mentioned in this paper reviews two books by Williams including "Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline" and "The Sense of the Past" and concludes that "the sense of the past is a metaphor for the past."
Abstract: The article reviews two books by Bernard Williams including "Philosophy As a Humanistic Discipline" and "The Sense of the Past."


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors argue that there is a substantial difference between propositions and fictional characters, which Schiffer presents as typical pleonastic entities, and they conclude that if fictional characters are typical Pleonastic Entities, then Schiffer fails to show that propositions are not Pleonastically Entities.
Abstract: Stephen Schiffer holds that propositions are pleonastic entities. I will argue that there is a substantial difference between propositions and fictional characters, which Schiffer presents as typical pleonastic entities. My conclusion will be that if fictional characters are typical pleonastic entities, then Schiffer fails to show that propositions are pleonastic entities.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that the response to this denial should take the form, not of an investigation of a theological position concerning God's knowledge (can God look into the human mind?), but of a negotiation of the difficulties affecting our use of this picture.
Abstract: In this paper my aim is to consider the picture of God's immediate knowledge of the mind as this appears in Wittgenstein's work, where its soundness seems to be brought into question. My argument is that the response to this denial should take the form, not of an investigation of a theological position concerning God's knowledge (“can God look into the human mind?”), but of a negotiation of the difficulties affecting our use of this picture. A great part of the latter can be seen as difficulties in mastering the communicative relation between God and man which lies at the heart of the religious form of life, and which arises from the dislocation which familiar language-games undergo within it.