Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Confessions', 'Philosophical Letters from England' and 'Psychosemantics'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


50 ideas

5. Theory of Logic / F. Referring in Logic / 1. Naming / a. Names
'Jocasta' needs to be distinguished from 'Oedipus's mother' because they are connected by different properties [Fodor]
     Full Idea: If the concept 'Jocasta' needs to be distinguished from the concept 'Oedipus's mother', that's all right because the two concepts are connected with different properties.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 84)
7. Existence / A. Nature of Existence / 2. Types of Existence
I prefer a lack of form to mean non-existence, than to think of some quasi-existence [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I sooner judged that what lacks all form does not exist, than thought of as something in between form and nothing, neither formed nor nothing, unformed and next to nothing.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XII.6), quoted by Robert Pasnau - Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 03.1
     A reaction: Scholastics were struck by the contrast between this remark, and the remark of Averroes (Idea 16587) that prime matter was halfway existence. Their two great authorities disagreed! This sort of thing stimulated the revival of metaphysics.
7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 1. Ontologies
Three main questions seem to be whether a thing is, what it is, and what sort it is [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I am told that I can ask three sorts of questions - whether a thing is, what it is, and what sort it is.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.10)
     A reaction: This seems to be a very Aristotelian approach. I am pleased to see that what it is and what sort it is are not conflated. The first one must be its individual essence, and the second its generic essence.
8. Modes of Existence / B. Properties / 10. Properties as Predicates
A particle and a coin heads-or-tails pick out to perfectly well-defined predicates and properties [Fodor]
     Full Idea: 'Is a particle and my coin is heads' and 'is a particle and my coin is tails' are perfectly well defined predicates and they pick out perfectly well defined (relational) properties of physical particles.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], Ch.2)
     A reaction: (Somewhat paraphrased). This is a very nice offering for the case that all predicates are properties, and hence that 'properties' is an entirely conventional category. It strikes me as self-evident that Fodor is not picking out 'natural' properties.
12. Knowledge Sources / A. A Priori Knowledge / 3. Innate Knowledge / a. Innate knowledge
Contrary to commonsense, most of what is in the mind seems to be unlearned [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Contrary to commonsense, it looks as though much of what is in the mind is unlearned.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 15)
Sticklebacks have an innate idea that red things are rivals [Fodor]
     Full Idea: God gave the male stickleback the idea that whatever is red is a rival.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p.133)
Evolution suggests that innate knowledge of human psychology would be beneficial [Fodor]
     Full Idea: If I had to design homo sapiens, I would have made commonsense knowledge of homo sapiens psychology innate; that way nobody would have to spend time learning it.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p.132)
12. Knowledge Sources / E. Direct Knowledge / 4. Memory
Mind and memory are the same, as shown in 'bear it in mind' or 'it slipped from mind' [Augustine]
     Full Idea: The mind and the memory are one and the same. We even call the memory the mind, for when we tell a person to remember something, we tell them to 'bear this in mind', and when we forget something 'it slipped out of my mind'.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.14)
     A reaction: This idea has become familiar in modern neuroscience, I think, presumably because we do not find distinct types of neurons for consciousness and for memory.
Memory contains innumerable principles of maths, as well as past sense experiences [Augustine]
     Full Idea: The memory contains the innumerable principles and laws of numbers and dimensions. None of these can have been conveyed to me by the bodily senses.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.12)
     A reaction: Even if you have a fairly empirical view of the sources of mathematics (a view with which I sympathise), it must by admitted that our endless extrapolations from the sources also reside in memory. So we remember thoughts as well as experiences.
We would avoid remembering sorrow or fear if that triggered the emotions afresh [Augustine]
     Full Idea: If we had to experience sorrow or fear every time that we mentioned these emotions, no one would be willing to speak of them.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.14)
     A reaction: Remembering the death of a loved one can trigger fresh grief, but remembering their dangerous illness from which they recovered no longer contains the feeling of fear.
I can distinguish different smells even when I am not experiencing them [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I can distinguish the scent of lilies from that of violets, even though there is no scent at all in my nostrils.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.08)
     A reaction: Augustine has a nice introspective account of how we experience memory, and identifies lots of puzzling features. I know I can identify the smell of vinegar, but I can't bring it to mind, the way I can the appearance of roses.
Why does joy in my mind make me happy, but joy in my memory doesn't? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: How can it be that my mind can be happy because of the joy that is in it, and yet my memory is not sad by reason of the sadness that is in it?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.14)
     A reaction: This seems to contradict his thought in Idea 22981, that memory and mind are the same. Recall seems to be a part of consciousness which is not fully wired up to the rest of the mind.
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 1. Mind / e. Questions about mind
In CRTT thought may be represented, content must be [Fodor]
     Full Idea: In the Representation Theory of Mind, programs (the 'laws of thought') may be explicitly represented, but data structures (the 'contents of thought') have to be.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 25)
     A reaction: Presumably this is because content is where mental events actually meet up with the reality being considered. It may be an abstract procedure, but if it doesn't plug into reality then it isn't thought, but merely activity, like that of the liver.
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 6. Anti-Individualism
Memory is so vast that I cannot recognise it as part of my mind [Augustine]
     Full Idea: The memory is a vast immeasurable sanctuary. It is part of my nature, but I cannot understand all that I am. Hence the mind is too narrow to contain itself entirely. Is the other part outside of itself, and not within it? How then can it be a part?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.08)
     A reaction: He seems to understand the mind as entirely consisting of consciousness. Nevertheless, this seems to be the first inklings of the modern externalist view of the mind.
15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 4. Intentionality / b. Intentionality theories
We can't use propositions to explain intentional attitudes, because they would need explaining [Fodor]
     Full Idea: It's not clear what the point would be of an explanation of the intentionality of attitudes which presupposes objects that are intentional intrinsically. Why not just say that the attitudes are?
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], Ch.3)
Intentionality doesn't go deep enough to appear on the physicists' ultimate list of things [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Sooner or later the physicists will complete the catalogue of ultimate and irreducible things, with the likes of spin, charm and charge. But aboutness won't be on the list; intentionality simply doesn't go that deep.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], 4 Intro)
     A reaction: I totally agree with this, which I take to be a warning to John Searle against including something called 'intrinsic intentionality' into his ontology. Intentionality 'emerges' out of certain complex brain activity.
16. Persons / D. Continuity of the Self / 2. Mental Continuity / a. Memory is Self
Without memory I could not even speak of myself [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I do not understand the power of memory that is in myself, although without it I could not even speak of myself.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.16)
     A reaction: Even if the self is not identical with memory, this idea seems to establish that memory is an essential aspect of the self. This point is neglected by those who see the self as an entity (the 'soul pearl') which persists through all experience.
16. Persons / F. Free Will / 6. Determinism / a. Determinism
If the future does not exist, how can prophets see it? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: How do prophets see the future, if there is not a future to be seen?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.17)
     A reaction: The answer, I suspect, is that prophets can't see the future. The prospect that the future already exists would seem to saboutage human freedom and responsibility, and point to Calvinist predestination, and even fatalism.
17. Mind and Body / B. Behaviourism / 4. Behaviourism Critique
Behaviourism has no theory of mental causation [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Behaviourists had trouble providing a robust construal of mental causation (and hence had no logical space for a psychology of mental processes).
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 67)
     A reaction: If they could reduce all mental events to stimulus-response, that seems to fall within the normal procedures of physical causation. There is no problem of mental causation if your ontology is entirely physical.
17. Mind and Body / C. Functionalism / 2. Machine Functionalism
Any piece of software can always be hard-wired [Fodor]
     Full Idea: For any machine that computes a function by executing an explicit algorithm, there exists a hard-wired machine that computes the same function by not executing an explicit algorithm.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 23)
     A reaction: It is certainly vital for functionalists to understand that software can be hardwired. Presumably we should understand a hardwired alogirthm as 'implicit'?
17. Mind and Body / C. Functionalism / 4. Causal Functionalism
Causal powers must be a crucial feature of mental states [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Everybody is a functionalist, in that we all hold that mental states are individuated, at least in part, by reference to their causal powers.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p.138)
     A reaction: I might individuate the Prime Minister by the carnation in his buttonhole. However, even a dualist must concede that we individuate mental faculties by their role within the mind.
17. Mind and Body / C. Functionalism / 6. Homuncular Functionalism
Mind is a set of hierarchical 'homunculi', which are made up in turn from subcomponents [Fodor, by Lycan]
     Full Idea: Fodor sees behaviour as manifestations of psychological capacities, which result from the subject being a set of interconnected 'homunculi', which in turn have subcomponents, all of it arranged in a hierarchy.
     From: report of Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987]) by William Lycan - Introduction - Ontology p.9
     A reaction: This may well miss out the most interesting parts of a mind (such as awareness, and personal identity), but it sounds basically right, especially when an evolutionary history is added to the system. Parts of my mind intrude into my trains of thought.
17. Mind and Body / D. Property Dualism / 5. Supervenience of mind
Supervenience gives good support for mental causation [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Mind/brain supervenience is the best idea anyone has had so far about how mental causation is possible.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 30)
     A reaction: I would have thought that mind brain identity was a much better idea (see Idea 3440). Supervenience seems to prove that 'mental causation' occurs, but doesn't explain it.
17. Mind and Body / E. Mind as Physical / 4. Connectionism
Hume's associationism offers no explanation at all of rational thought [Fodor]
     Full Idea: With Associationism there proved to be no way to get a rational mental life to emerge from the sorts of causal relations among thoughts that the 'laws of association' recognised.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 18)
     A reaction: This might not be true if you add the concept of evolution, which has refined the associations to generate truth (which is vital for survival).
17. Mind and Body / E. Mind as Physical / 7. Anti-Physicalism / a. Physicalism critique
If mind is just physical, how can it follow the rules required for intelligent thought? [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Central state identity theorists had trouble providing for the nomological possibility of rational machines (and hence no space for a non-biological, e.g. computational, theory of intelligence).
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 67)
     A reaction: I surmise that a more externalist account of the physical mind might do the trick, by explaining intelligence in terms of an evolved relationship between brain and environment.
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 1. Thought
We may be able to explain rationality mechanically [Fodor]
     Full Idea: We are on the verge of solving a great mystery about the mind: how is rationality mechanically possible?
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 20)
     A reaction: Optimistic, given that AI has struggled to implement natural languages, mainly because common sense knowledge seems too complex to encode. Can a machine determine logical forms of sentences?
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 4. Folk Psychology
Folk psychology is the only explanation of behaviour we have [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Commonsense belief/desire psychology explains vastly more of the facts about behaviour than any of the alternative theories available. It could hardly fail to; there are no alternative theories available.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p.x)
     A reaction: The alternative view wouldn't expect a clear-cut theory, because it deals with the endless complexity of brain events. The charge is that Fodor and co oversimplify their account, in their desperation for a 'theory'.
18. Thought / B. Mechanics of Thought / 4. Language of Thought
Belief and desire are structured states, which need mentalese [Fodor]
     Full Idea: A defence of the language of thought has to be an argument that believing and desiring are typically structured states.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p.136)
     A reaction: A structure is one thing, and a language is another. Both believings and desirings can be extremely vague, to the point where the owner is unsure what is believed or desired. They can, of course, be extremely precise.
18. Thought / B. Mechanics of Thought / 5. Mental Files
Memories are preserved separately, according to category [Augustine]
     Full Idea: In memory everything is preserved separately, according to its category.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.08)
     A reaction: This strikes me as the first seeds of the idea that the mind functions by means of mental files. Our memories of cats are 'close to' or 'linked to' our memories of dogs.
18. Thought / C. Content / 7. Narrow Content
Obsession with narrow content leads to various sorts of hopeless anti-realism [Fodor]
     Full Idea: People who ask what the narrow content of the thought that water is wet is (for example) get what they deserve: phenomenalism, verificationism, 'procedural' semantics, or scepticism, according to temperament.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 51)
     A reaction: The question is whether content IS narrow. We could opt for broad content because then we wouldn't have to worry about scepticism, but I doubt whether we would then sleep well at night.
18. Thought / C. Content / 10. Causal Semantics
Do identical thoughts have identical causal roles? [Fodor]
     Full Idea: If thoughts have their causal roles in virtue of their contents, then two thoughts with identical contents ought to be identical in their causal roles.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p.140)
     A reaction: A pencil would presumably have the same causal role if it wrote a love poem or hate mail. But a pencil is also good for scratching your back. 'Causal role' can be a rather vacuous idea.
19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 3. Meaning as Speaker's Intention
Grice thinks meaning is inherited from the propositional attitudes which sentences express [Fodor]
     Full Idea: According to Gricean theories of meaning, the meaning of a sentence is inherited from the propositional attitudes that the sentence is conventionally used to express.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 50)
     A reaction: Since the propositional attitudes contain propositions, this seems like a very plausible idea. If an indexical like 'I' is involved, the meaning of the sentence is not the same as its 'conventional' use.
19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 4. Meaning as Truth-Conditions
Whatever in the mind delivers falsehood is parasitic on what delivers truth [Fodor]
     Full Idea: The mechanisms that deliver falsehoods are somehow parasitic on the ones that deliver truths.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p.107)
     A reaction: In the case of a sentence and its negation it is not clear which one is 'parasitic', because that can usually be reversed by paraphrasing. Historically, I very much hope that truth-speaking came first.
19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 5. Meaning as Verification
Many different verification procedures can reach 'star', but it only has one semantic value [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Verification procedures connect terms with their denotations in too many ways. Different routes to 'star' do not determine different semantic values for 'star'.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p.125)
     A reaction: This fairly conclusively shows that meaning is not 'the method of verification' - but that wasn't a difficult target to hit.
19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 6. Meaning as Use
The meaning of a sentence derives from its use in expressing an attitude [Fodor]
     Full Idea: The meaning of a sentence derives from its use in expressing an attitude.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 79)
     A reaction: Among other things. It can also arrive from a desire to remember something. A sentence can also acquire meaning compositionally (by assembling) with no use or aim.
19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 7. Meaning Holism / b. Language holism
Meaning holism is a crazy doctrine [Fodor]
     Full Idea: Meaning holism really is a crazy doctrine.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 60)
     A reaction: Yes. What is not crazy is a contextualist account of utterances, and a recognition of the contextual and relational ingredient in the meanings of most of our sentences.
19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 7. Meaning Holism / c. Meaning by Role
Very different mental states can share their contents, so content doesn't seem to be constructed from functional role [Fodor]
     Full Idea: It's an embarrassment for attempts to construct content from functional role that quite different sorts of mental states can nevertheless share their contents.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 70)
     A reaction: That is, presumably, one content having two different roles. Two contents with the same role is 'multiple realisability'. Pain can tell me I'm damaged, or reveal that my damaged nerves are healing. Problem?
19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 8. Synonymy
Mental states may have the same content but different extensions [Fodor]
     Full Idea: The identity of the content of mental states does not ensure the identity of their extensions.
     From: Jerry A. Fodor (Psychosemantics [1987], p. 45)
     A reaction: Obviously if I am thinking each day about 'my sheep', that won't change if I am unaware that one of them died this morning. …Because I didn’t have the precise number of sheep in mind.
22. Metaethics / C. The Good / 2. Happiness / c. Value of happiness
Everyone wants happiness [Augustine]
     Full Idea: Surely happiness is what everyone wants, so much so that there can be none who do not want it?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.20)
     A reaction: His concept of happiness is, of course, religious. Occasionally you meet habitual grumblers about life who give the impression that they are only happy when they are discontented. So happiness is achieving desires, not feeling good?
23. Ethics / B. Contract Ethics / 2. Golden Rule
The Golden Rule is accepted everywhere, and gives a fixed target for morality [Voltaire]
     Full Idea: Pascal asks where we can find a fixed point in morality. The answer is in that single maxim accepted by all nations: "Do not do to others what you would not like to have done to you".
     From: Francois-Marie Voltaire (Philosophical Letters from England [1733], 25)
     A reaction: Should I only offer to my guests foods which I myself like? If I don't mind a bit of pain, is it all right to inflict it? It is a sensible rule, but not precise enough for philosophy.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / c. Idealist time
Maybe time is an extension of the mind [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I begin to wonder whether time is an extension of the mind itself.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.26)
     A reaction: The observation that the mind creates a 'specious present' (spreading experience out over a short fraction of second) reinforces this. Personally I like David Marshall's proposal that consciousness is entirely memory, which would deny this idea.
To be aware of time it can only exist in the mind, as memory or anticipation [Augustine, by Bardon]
     Full Idea: Augustine answers that for us to be aware of time it must exist only in the mind, …and the difference between past and future is just the difference between memory and anticipation.
     From: report of Augustine (Confessions [c.398]) by Adrian Bardon - Brief History of the Philosophy of Time 1 'Augustine's'
     A reaction: This is an extreme idealist view. Are we to say that the past consists only of what can be remembered, and the future only of what is anticipated? Absurd anti-realism, in my view. Where do his concepts come from, asks Le Poidevin.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / g. Growing block
How can ten days ahead be a short time, if it doesn't exist? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: A short time ago or a short time ahead we might put at ten days, but how can anything which does not exist be either long or short?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.15)
     A reaction: A nice question, which gets at the paradoxical nature of time very nicely. How can it be long, but non-existent? We could break the paradox by concluding '..and therefore time does exist', even though we can't see how.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / h. Presentism
If the past is no longer, and the future is not yet, how can they exist? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: Of the three divisions of time, how can two, the past and the future, be, when the past no longer is, and the future is not yet?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.14)
     A reaction: This is the oldest bewilderment about time, which naturally leads us to the thought that time cannot actually 'exist'. The remark implies that at least 'now' is safe, but that also succumbs to paradox pretty quickly.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / i. Denying time
The whole of the current year is not present, so how can it exist? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: We cannot say that the whole of the current year is present, and if the whole of it is not present, the year is not present.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.15)
     A reaction: Another nice way of presenting the paradox of time. We are in a particular year, so it has to be real.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 2. Passage of Time / a. Experience of time
I know what time is, until someone asks me to explain it [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I know well enough what time is, provided that nobody asks me; but if I am asked what it is and try to explain, I am baffled.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.14)
     A reaction: A justly famous remark, even though it adds nothing to our knowledge of time. This sort of thought pushes us towards accepting many things as axiomatic, such as time, space, identity, persons, mind.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 2. Passage of Time / h. Change in time
I disagree with the idea that time is nothing but cosmic movement [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I once heard a learned man say that time is nothing but the movement of the sun and the moon and the stars, but I do not agree.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.22)
     A reaction: It is tempting to say that you either take time or movement as axiomatic, and describe one in terms of the other, but you are stuck unable to give the initial statement of the axiom without mentioning the second property you were saving for later.
27. Natural Reality / E. Cosmology / 3. The Beginning
Heaven and earth must be created, because they are subject to change [Augustine]
     Full Idea: The fact that heaven and earth are there proclaims that they were created, for they are subject to change and variation; ..the meaning of change and variation is that something is there which was not there before.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.04)
     A reaction: It seems possible that the underlying matter is eternal (as in various conservation laws, such as that of energy), and that all change is in the form rather than the substance.
28. God / A. Divine Nature / 5. God and Time
If God existed before creation, why would a perfect being desire to change things? [Augustine, by Bardon]
     Full Idea: If nothing existed by God before creation, then what could have happened to, or within, God that led God to decide to create the universe at that particular moment? Why would an eternal or perfect being want or need to change?
     From: report of Augustine (Confessions [c.398]) by Adrian Bardon - Brief History of the Philosophy of Time 1 'Augustine's'
     A reaction: I suppose you could reply that change is superior to stasis, but then why did God delay the creation?
If God is outside time in eternity, can He hear prayers? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: O Lord, since you are outside time in eternity, are you unaware of the things that I tell you?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.01)
     A reaction: This strikes me as the single most difficult and most elusive question about the nature of a supreme divine being. If the being is trapped in time, as we are, it is greatly diminished, and if it is outside, it is hard to see how it could be a participant.