more on this theme     |     more from this text


Single Idea 2554

[filed under theme 15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 4. Intentionality / b. Intentionality theories ]

Full Idea

Following Wittgenstein, we shall treat the intentional as merely a subspecies of the functional.

Gist of Idea

Is intentionality a special sort of function?

Source

Richard Rorty (Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature [1980], 1.3)

Book Ref

Rorty,Richard: 'Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature' [Blackwell 1980], p.32


A Reaction

Intriguing but obscure. Sounds wrong to me. The intentional refers to the content of thoughts, but function concerns their role. They have roles because they have content, so they can't be the same.


The 16 ideas from Richard Rorty

If we can't check our language against experience, philosophy is just comparing beliefs and words [Rorty]
Rorty seems to view truth as simply being able to hold one's view against all comers [Rorty, by O'Grady]
For James truth is "what it is better for us to believe" rather than a correct picture of reality [Rorty]
If knowledge is merely justified belief, justification is social [Rorty]
Pain lacks intentionality; beliefs lack qualia [Rorty]
Is intentionality a special sort of function? [Rorty]
The mind is a property, or it is baffling [Rorty]
Rational certainty may be victory in argument rather than knowledge of facts [Rorty]
Analytical philosophy seems to have little interest in how to tell a good analysis from a bad one [Rorty]
Since Hegel we have tended to see a human as merely animal if it is outside a society [Rorty]
Davidson's theory of meaning focuses not on terms, but on relations between sentences [Rorty]
Can meanings remain the same when beliefs change? [Rorty]
A theory of reference seems needed to pick out objects without ghostly inner states [Rorty]
Nature has no preferred way of being represented [Rorty]
You can't debate about whether to have higher standards for the application of words [Rorty]
Knowing has no definable essence, but is a social right, found in the context of conversations [Rorty]