Magazine et Edition

Volume 14 (2022): Edition 64 (May 2022)

Volume 13 (2021): Edition 61 (November 2021)

Volume 13 (2021): Edition 60 (May 2021)

Volume 12 (2020): Edition 59 (December 2020)

Volume 12 (2020): Edition 58 (December 2020)
SPECIAL ISSUE: ON THE VERY IDEA OF LOGICAL FORM

Volume 12 (2020): Edition 57 (November 2020)

Volume 12 (2020): Edition 56 (May 2020)

Volume 11 (2019): Edition 55 (December 2019)
Special Edition: Chalmers on Virtual Reality

Volume 11 (2019): Edition 54 (December 2019)
Special Edition: III Blasco Disputatio, Singular terms in fiction. Fictional and “real” names

Volume 11 (2019): Edition 53 (November 2019)

Volume 11 (2019): Edition 52 (May 2019)

Volume 10 (2018): Edition 51 (December 2018)
SYMPOSIUM ON JASON STANLEY’S “HOW PROPAGANDA WORKS”

Volume 10 (2018): Edition 50 (December 2018)

Volume 10 (2018): Edition 49 (November 2018)

Volume 10 (2018): Edition 48 (May 2018)

Volume 9 (2017): Edition 47 (December 2017)

Volume 9 (2017): Edition 46 (November 2017)

Volume 9 (2017): Edition 45 (October 2017)

Volume 9 (2017): Edition 44 (May 2017)

Volume 8 (2016): Edition 43 (November 2016)

Volume 8 (2016): Edition 42 (May 2016)

Volume 7 (2015): Edition 41 (November 2015)

Volume 7 (2015): Edition 40 (May 2015)

Volume 6 (2014): Edition 39 (November 2014)

Volume 6 (2014): Edition 38 (May 2014)

Volume 5 (2013): Edition 37 (November 2013)

Volume 5 (2013): Edition 36 (October 2013)
Book symposium on François Recanati’s Mental Files

Volume 5 (2013): Edition 35 (May 2013)

Volume 4 (2012): Edition 34 (December 2012)

Volume 4 (2012): Edition 33 (November 2012)

Volume 4 (2012): Edition 32 (May 2012)
New Perspectives on Quine’s “Word and Object”

Volume 4 (2011): Edition 31 (November 2011)

Volume 4 (2011): Edition 30 (May 2011)
XII Taller d'Investigació en Filosofia

Volume 4 (2010): Edition 29 (November 2010)
Petrus Hispanus 2009

Volume 3 (2010): Edition 28 (May 2010)

Volume 3 (2009): Edition 27 (November 2009)
Homage to M. S. Lourenço

Volume 3 (2009): Edition 26 (May 2009)

Volume 3 (2008): Edition 25 (November 2008)

Volume 2 (2008): Edition 24 (May 2008)

Volume 2 (2007): Edition 23 (November 2007)
Normativity and Rationality

Volume 2 (2007): Edition 22 (May 2007)

Volume 2 (2006): Edition 21 (November 2006)

Volume 1 (2006): Edition 20 (May 2006)

Volume 1 (2005): Edition 19 (November 2005)

Volume 1 (2005): Edition 18 (May 2005)

Volume 1 (2004): Edition 17 (November 2004)

Volume 1 (2004): Edition 16 (May 2004)

Volume 1 (2003): Edition 15 (November 2003)

Volume 1 (2003): Edition 14 (May 2003)

Volume 1 (2002): Edition 13 (November 2002)

Volume 1 (2001): Edition 11 (November 2001)

Volume 1 (2002): Edition 11-12 (May 2002)

Volume 1 (2001): Edition 10 (May 2001)

Volume 1 (2000): Edition 9 (November 2000)

Volume 1 (2000): Edition 8 (May 2000)

Volume 1 (1999): Edition 7 (November 1999)

Volume 1 (1999): Edition 6 (May 1999)

Volume 1 (1998): Edition 4 (May 1998)

Volume 1 (1997): Edition 3 (November 1997)

Volume 1 (1998): Edition s2 (November 1998)
Special Edition: Petrus Hispanus Lectures 1998: o Mental e o Físico, Guest Editors: Joao Branquinho; M. S. Lourenço

Volume 1 (1997): Edition 2 (May 1997)

Volume 1 (1996): Edition 1 (December 1996)

Volume 1 (1998): Edition s1 (June 1998)
Special Edition: Language, Logic and Mind Forum, Guest Editors: Joao Branquinho; M. S. Lourenço

Détails du magazine
Format
Magazine
eISSN
2182-2875
Première publication
16 Apr 2017
Période de publication
4 fois par an
Langues
Anglais

Chercher

Volume 4 (2011): Edition 30 (May 2011)
XII Taller d'Investigació en Filosofia

Détails du magazine
Format
Magazine
eISSN
2182-2875
Première publication
16 Apr 2017
Période de publication
4 fois par an
Langues
Anglais

Chercher

8 Articles
Accès libre

Editor’s Introduction

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 103 - 105

Résumé

Accès libre

Do honeybees have concepts?

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 107 - 125

Résumé

Abstract

Can animals think? In this paper I address the proposal that many animals, including insects such as honeybees, have genuine thoughts. I consider one prominent version of this view (Carruthers 2004; 2006) that claims that honeybees can represent and process information about their environments in a way that satisfies the main hallmarks of human conceptual thought. I shall argue, however, that this view fails to provide convincing grounds for accepting that animals possess concepts. More precisely, I suggest that two important aspects of conceptual thought, viz., concept individuation and the generality constraint, are not satisfied.

Mots clés

  • Animal cognition
  • concepts
  • modularity
  • concept individuation
  • generality constraint
Accès libre

Might-counterfactuals and the principle of conditional excluded middle

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 127 - 149

Résumé

Abstract

Owing to the problem of inescapable clashes, epistemic accounts of might-counterfactuals have recently gained traction. In a different vein, the might argument against conditional excluded middle has rendered the latter a contentious principle to incorporate into a logic for conditionals. The aim of this paper is to rescue both ontic mightcounterfactuals and conditional excluded middle from these disparate debates and show them to be compatible. I argue that the antecedent of a might-counterfactual is semantically underdetermined with respect to the counterfactual worlds it selects for evaluation. This explains how might-counterfactuals select multiple counterfactual worlds as they apparently do and why their utterance confers a weaker alethic commitment on the speaker than does that of a would-counterfactual, as well as provides an ontic solution to inescapable clashes. I briefly sketch how the semantic underdetermination and truth conditions of mightcounterfactuals are regulated by conversational context.

Mots clés

  • Inescapable clashes
  • counterfactuals
  • Lewis-Stalnaker
  • possible worlds
  • semantic underdetermination
Accès libre

On the transcendental deduction in Kant’s Groundwork III

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 151 - 169

Résumé

Abstract

The purpose of the third section of Kant’s Groundwork is to prove the possibility of the categorical imperative. In the end of the second section, Kant establishes that a proof like this is necessary to show that morality is ‘something’ and ‘not a chimerical idea without any truth’ or a ‘phantom’ (1785: 445). Since the categorical imperative was established as a synthetic a priori practical proposition, in order to prove its possibility it is necessary ‘to go beyond cognition of objects to a critique of the subject, that is, of pure practical reason’ (1785: 440). Kant names this kind of proof a deduction. The present paper intends to (1) show the argument whose purpose is to justify the categorical imperative; (2) show that the argument is a transcendental deduction; (3) present the argument as it is reconstructed by Allison, and (4) show that, although it seems compelling, the position of the commentator could not be accepted by Kant himself.

Mots clés

  • Kant
  • transcendental deduction
  • moral law
  • categorical imperative
Accès libre

Visual Experience and Demonstrative Thought

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 171 - 193

Résumé

Abstract

I raise a problem for common-factor theories of experience concerning the demonstrative thoughts we form on the basis of experience. Building on an insight of Paul Snowdon 1992, I argue that in order to demonstratively refer to an item via conscious awareness of a distinct intermediary the subject must have some understanding that she is aware of a distinct intermediary. This becomes an issue for common-factor theories insofar as it is also widely agreed that the general, pre-philosophical or ‘naïve’ view of experience does not accept that in normal perceptual cases one is consciously aware of non-environmental (inner, mental) features. I argue then that the standard common-factor view of experience should be committed to attributing quite widespread referential errors or failures amongst the general, non-philosophical populace – which seems an unattractively radical commitment. After clarifying the various assumptions I am making about experience and demonstrative thoughts, I consider a number of possible responses on behalf of the common-factor theorist. I finish by arguing that my argument should apply to any common-factor theory, not just avowedly ‘indirect’ theories.

Mots clés

  • Visual Experience
  • Demonstrative Thought
  • Common-factor
  • Intentionalism
  • Paul Snowdon
Accès libre

The Disordered Mind: An Introduction to Philosophy of Mind and Mental Illness

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 195 - 199

Résumé

Accès libre

LOT 2: The Language of Thought Revisited

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 199 - 204

Résumé

Accès libre

Narratives and Narrators: A Philosophy of Stories

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 204 - 213

Résumé

8 Articles
Accès libre

Editor’s Introduction

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 103 - 105

Résumé

Accès libre

Do honeybees have concepts?

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 107 - 125

Résumé

Abstract

Can animals think? In this paper I address the proposal that many animals, including insects such as honeybees, have genuine thoughts. I consider one prominent version of this view (Carruthers 2004; 2006) that claims that honeybees can represent and process information about their environments in a way that satisfies the main hallmarks of human conceptual thought. I shall argue, however, that this view fails to provide convincing grounds for accepting that animals possess concepts. More precisely, I suggest that two important aspects of conceptual thought, viz., concept individuation and the generality constraint, are not satisfied.

Mots clés

  • Animal cognition
  • concepts
  • modularity
  • concept individuation
  • generality constraint
Accès libre

Might-counterfactuals and the principle of conditional excluded middle

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 127 - 149

Résumé

Abstract

Owing to the problem of inescapable clashes, epistemic accounts of might-counterfactuals have recently gained traction. In a different vein, the might argument against conditional excluded middle has rendered the latter a contentious principle to incorporate into a logic for conditionals. The aim of this paper is to rescue both ontic mightcounterfactuals and conditional excluded middle from these disparate debates and show them to be compatible. I argue that the antecedent of a might-counterfactual is semantically underdetermined with respect to the counterfactual worlds it selects for evaluation. This explains how might-counterfactuals select multiple counterfactual worlds as they apparently do and why their utterance confers a weaker alethic commitment on the speaker than does that of a would-counterfactual, as well as provides an ontic solution to inescapable clashes. I briefly sketch how the semantic underdetermination and truth conditions of mightcounterfactuals are regulated by conversational context.

Mots clés

  • Inescapable clashes
  • counterfactuals
  • Lewis-Stalnaker
  • possible worlds
  • semantic underdetermination
Accès libre

On the transcendental deduction in Kant’s Groundwork III

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 151 - 169

Résumé

Abstract

The purpose of the third section of Kant’s Groundwork is to prove the possibility of the categorical imperative. In the end of the second section, Kant establishes that a proof like this is necessary to show that morality is ‘something’ and ‘not a chimerical idea without any truth’ or a ‘phantom’ (1785: 445). Since the categorical imperative was established as a synthetic a priori practical proposition, in order to prove its possibility it is necessary ‘to go beyond cognition of objects to a critique of the subject, that is, of pure practical reason’ (1785: 440). Kant names this kind of proof a deduction. The present paper intends to (1) show the argument whose purpose is to justify the categorical imperative; (2) show that the argument is a transcendental deduction; (3) present the argument as it is reconstructed by Allison, and (4) show that, although it seems compelling, the position of the commentator could not be accepted by Kant himself.

Mots clés

  • Kant
  • transcendental deduction
  • moral law
  • categorical imperative
Accès libre

Visual Experience and Demonstrative Thought

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 171 - 193

Résumé

Abstract

I raise a problem for common-factor theories of experience concerning the demonstrative thoughts we form on the basis of experience. Building on an insight of Paul Snowdon 1992, I argue that in order to demonstratively refer to an item via conscious awareness of a distinct intermediary the subject must have some understanding that she is aware of a distinct intermediary. This becomes an issue for common-factor theories insofar as it is also widely agreed that the general, pre-philosophical or ‘naïve’ view of experience does not accept that in normal perceptual cases one is consciously aware of non-environmental (inner, mental) features. I argue then that the standard common-factor view of experience should be committed to attributing quite widespread referential errors or failures amongst the general, non-philosophical populace – which seems an unattractively radical commitment. After clarifying the various assumptions I am making about experience and demonstrative thoughts, I consider a number of possible responses on behalf of the common-factor theorist. I finish by arguing that my argument should apply to any common-factor theory, not just avowedly ‘indirect’ theories.

Mots clés

  • Visual Experience
  • Demonstrative Thought
  • Common-factor
  • Intentionalism
  • Paul Snowdon
Accès libre

The Disordered Mind: An Introduction to Philosophy of Mind and Mental Illness

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 195 - 199

Résumé

Accès libre

LOT 2: The Language of Thought Revisited

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 199 - 204

Résumé

Accès libre

Narratives and Narrators: A Philosophy of Stories

Publié en ligne: 31 Dec 2018
Pages: 204 - 213

Résumé

Planifiez votre conférence à distance avec Sciendo