Abstract
In their helpful criticisms of Coming to Our Senses (1996) both David Sosa (1997) and Kenneth Taylor (1997) resist idea that they are revisionists about meanings. I shall argue that they must accept idea. Of course, to be revisionist is not necessarily to be wrong: many parts of theoretical status quo have been wrong in past and some are surely wrong now. Most of one's best friends are revisionist about something. However, I shall argue, revisionisms of Sosa and Taylor are wrong. Sosa's rests on popular but mistaken conviction that a properly scientific explanation of behavior must ascribe narrow properties to thoughts. I shall call this the narrow conviction. Taylor's eliminativism rests on popular but mistaken conviction that explanation must ascribe cognitively rich properties. I shall call this the rich conviction.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
