more on this theme     |     more from this text


Single Idea 11147

[filed under theme 1. Philosophy / F. Analytic Philosophy / 7. Limitations of Analysis ]

Full Idea

Philosophers who oppose conceptual analysis identify their approach as being 'naturalistic'. Philosophy is supposed to be continuous with science, and philosophical theories are to be defended on explanatory grounds, not by a priori intuitions.

Gist of Idea

Naturalistic philosophers oppose analysis, preferring explanation to a priori intuition

Source

E Margolis/S Laurence (Concepts [2009], 5.2)

Book Ref

'Stanford Online Encyclopaedia of Philosophy', ed/tr. Stanford University [plato.stanford.edu], p.19


A Reaction

[They cite Papineau 1993, Devitt 1996 aand Kornblith 2002] I think there is a happy compromise here. I agree that any philosophical knowledge should be continuous with science, but we shouldn't prejudge how the analytic branch of science is done.


The 23 ideas from E Margolis/S Laurence

Concepts are either representations, or abilities, or Fregean senses [Margolis/Laurence]
A computer may have propositional attitudes without representations [Margolis/Laurence]
Language of thought has subject/predicate form and includes logical devices [Margolis/Laurence]
Do mental representations just lead to a vicious regress of explanations [Margolis/Laurence]
Maybe the concept CAT is just the ability to discriminate and infer about cats [Margolis/Laurence]
The abilities view cannot explain the productivity of thought, or mental processes [Margolis/Laurence]
Classically, concepts give necessary and sufficient conditions for falling under them [Margolis/Laurence]
Typicality challenges the classical view; we see better fruit-prototypes in apples than in plums [Margolis/Laurence]
The classical theory explains acquisition, categorization and reference [Margolis/Laurence]
It may be that our concepts (such as 'knowledge') have no definitional structure [Margolis/Laurence]
The prototype theory is probabilistic, picking something out if it has sufficient of the properties [Margolis/Laurence]
Prototype theory categorises by computing the number of shared constituents [Margolis/Laurence]
People don't just categorise by apparent similarities [Margolis/Laurence]
Complex concepts have emergent properties not in the ingredient prototypes [Margolis/Laurence]
Many complex concepts obviously have no prototype [Margolis/Laurence]
The theory theory of concepts says they are parts of theories, defined by their roles [Margolis/Laurence]
The theory theory is holistic, so how can people have identical concepts? [Margolis/Laurence]
Maybe concepts have no structure, and determined by relations to the world, not to other concepts [Margolis/Laurence]
Concept-structure explains typicality, categories, development, reference and composition [Margolis/Laurence]
Modern empiricism tends to emphasise psychological connections, not semantic relations [Margolis/Laurence]
Body-type seems to affect a mind's cognition and conceptual scheme [Margolis/Laurence]
People can formulate new concepts which are only named later [Margolis/Laurence]
Naturalistic philosophers oppose analysis, preferring explanation to a priori intuition [Margolis/Laurence]