|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: John JonesJohn Jones Date: Aug 11, 2008 16:15
Externalism - that having or not having true beliefs are dependent on
the environment.
Putnam's classic argument for externalism starts with a thought
experiment: imagine that water comes in two forms - H2O on earth, and
XYZ on twin-earth. So, when both earthmen and twin-earthmen (who are
physically alike) say that 'water quenches thirst' they are expressing
different beliefs. This is externalism's claim.
There are many arguments against this idea - that the content of a
belief is dependent on external factors. The opposite argument is
internalism - that beliefs are an intrinsic property of the individual.
Both externalism and internalism are wrong, it seems to me. First, for
the externalist, there is no way that either H2O or XYZ can be
identified except by water. It is water that allows us to distinguish
H2O or XYZ from the cup that holds it, or the river from the river-bed.
|
| Show full article (2.68Kb) |
|
| | 7 Comments |
|
|
Author: Sir FrederickSir Frederick Date: Aug 11, 2008 20:23
But then "classical notions of belief" are folk lore.
As such you may dance on the head of a pin ad infinitum.
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: turtoniturtoni Date: Aug 11, 2008 22:46
On Aug 11, 7:15 pm, John Jones aol.com> wrote:> Externalism - that having or not having true beliefs are dependent on
> the environment.
>
> Putnam's classic argument for externalism starts with a thought
> experiment: imagine that water comes in two forms - H2O on earth, and
> XYZ on twin-earth. So, when both earthmen and twin-earthmen (who are
> physically alike) say that 'water quenches thirst' they are expressing
> different beliefs. This is externalism's claim.
>
> There are many arguments against this idea - that the content of a
> belief is dependent on external factors. The opposite argument is
> internalism - that beliefs are an intrinsic property of the individual.
>
> Both externalism and internalism are wrong, it seems to me. First, for
> the externalist, there is no way that either H2O or XYZ can be
> identified except by water. It is water that allows us to distinguish
> H2O or XYZ from the cup that holds it, or the river from the river-bed.
>
> For the internalist position, we have simply an environmental ...
|
| Show full article (3.79Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: ZerkonXZerkonX Date: Aug 12, 2008 03:54
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:15:59 +0100, John Jones wrote:
> For example, we have no belief or knowledge that one and one are two -
> they simply are two, for no alternative is on offer.
Huh? 1+1 is not simply just 2. 1 must be learned, the operation of
addition must be learned and usually the result '2' must be learned.
Until the thought process 'gets it' math is an exercise in memorization,
it is not self evident. '2' is the answer because one is told '2'
is the answer.
The alternatives are either 'I do not know' or another number.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Rec RoomRec Room Date: Aug 12, 2008 09:43
John Jones wrote:
>imagine that water comes in two forms -
> H2O on earth, and XYZ on twin-earth.
> So, when both earthmen and
> twin-earthmen (who are physically alike)
But the two Earthmen are not physcially alike if the body of one is
largely composed of H2O and the body of the other is largely composed of
XYZ. Or there is actually no difference between H2O and XYZ, in order
for the two Earthmen to be physically identical. Either way, that
particular example which externalists use is flawed during the *set-up*
stage.
Ecce Signum
- - - - - - - - - -
Recipients: Ignore all below.
Approved Users: This is displayed only as a caution for those who aren't
on BP's list. Do not opt to remove the sig before sending. You might
forget to restore it afterwards. Be sure to identify yourself in the
body with your initials or designated nickname. Thanks. :)
|
| Show full article (1.31Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: John JonesJohn Jones Date: Aug 12, 2008 12:50
Rec Room wrote:
> John Jones wrote:
>
>> imagine that water comes in two forms -
>> H2O on earth, and XYZ on twin-earth.
>> So, when both earthmen and
>> twin-earthmen (who are physically alike)
>
>
> But the two Earthmen are not physcially alike if the body of one is
> largely composed of H2O and the body of the other is largely composed of
> XYZ. Or there is actually no difference between H2O and XYZ, in order
> for the two Earthmen to be physically identical. Either way, that
> particular example which externalists use is flawed during the *set-up*
> stage.
>
> Ecce Signum
>
> - - - - - - - - - -
> ...
|
| Show full article (1.49Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: John JonesJohn Jones Date: Aug 12, 2008 12:53
Sir Frederick wrote:
> But then "classical notions of belief" are folk lore.
> As such you may dance on the head of a pin ad infinitum.
Your position is externalism. That is, what makes a thought or belief
real is the environment.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Sir FrederickSir Frederick Date: Aug 12, 2008 15:41
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:53:18 +0100, John Jones aol.com> wrote:
>Sir Frederick wrote:
>> But then "classical notions of belief" are folk lore.
>> As such you may dance on the head of a pin ad infinitum.
>
>Your position is externalism. That is, what makes a thought or belief
>real is the environment.
Yes, the brain is an environment. The virtual reality supported in the
environment of the human brain is considered real as a category mistake.
Some mistakes work, for awhile, even folk lore category mistakes,
that get genetically built in.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
