Combining Philosophers

Ideas for Jerry A. Fodor, Edouard Machery and Carrie Jenkins

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these philosophers

display all the ideas for this combination of philosophers


6 ideas

1. Philosophy / D. Nature of Philosophy / 3. Philosophy Defined
Who cares what 'philosophy' is? Most pre-1950 thought doesn't now count as philosophy [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Who cares what gets called 'philosophy'? It's my impression that most of what happened in philosophy before 1950 wouldn't qualify according to the present usage.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (LOT 2 [2008], Ch.3.5)
     A reaction: A rather breath-taking remark. Fodor is, of course, a devotee of David Hume, and of Descartes, but he never seems to refer to Greeks at all. Personally I presume that if you aren't doing what Plato and Aristotle were interested in, it ain't philosophy.
1. Philosophy / D. Nature of Philosophy / 5. Aims of Philosophy / a. Philosophy as worldly
Philosophy is empty if it does not in some way depend on matters of fact [Machery]
     Full Idea: Save, maybe, for purely formal (e.g. logical) theories, philosophical claims whose correctness does not depend, however indirectly, on matters of fact are empty: they are neither true nor false.
     From: Edouard Machery (Doing Without Concepts [2009], Intro)
     A reaction: I subscribe to this view. I'd even say that logic is empty if it is not answerable to the facts. The facts are nature, so this is a naturalistic manifesto.
1. Philosophy / F. Analytic Philosophy / 3. Analysis of Preconditions
Definitions often give necessary but not sufficient conditions for an extension [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Attempts to define a term frequently elicit necessary but not sufficient conditions for membership of its extension. This is called the 'X problem', as in 'kill' means 'cause to die' plus X.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (LOT 2 [2008], Ch.2.1 n3)
     A reaction: Fodor is one of the great sceptics about definition. I just don't see why we have to have totally successful definitions before we can accept the process as a worthwhile endeavour.
1. Philosophy / F. Analytic Philosophy / 4. Conceptual Analysis
Examining concepts can recover information obtained through the senses [Jenkins]
     Full Idea: My idea is that conceptual examination might be a way of recovering information previously obtained through the senses.
     From: Carrie Jenkins (Grounding Concepts [2008], 4.8)
     A reaction: Now you're talking! This is really interesting conceptual analysis, rather than the sort of stamp-collecting approach to analsis practised by the duller sort of philosopher. But why bother with conceptual examination, when you have senses?
It seems likely that analysis of concepts is impossible, but justification can survive without it [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Lots of philosophers fear that if concepts don't have analyses, justification breaks down. My own guess is that concepts don't have analyses and that justification will survive all the same.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (In a Critical Condition [2000], Ch. 3 n2)
1. Philosophy / F. Analytic Philosophy / 7. Limitations of Analysis
Despite all the efforts of philosophers, nothing can ever be reduced to anything [Fodor]
     Full Idea: The general truth is that nothing ever reduces to anything, however hard philosophers may try.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (In a Critical Condition [2000], Ch. 6)