Simplicity and elegance in Millikan’s account of productivity : reply to Martinez

Lade...
Vorschaubild
Dateien
Zu diesem Dokument gibt es keine Dateien.
Datum
2016
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
Kontakt
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
URI (zitierfähiger Link)
ArXiv-ID
Internationale Patentnummer
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Sammlungen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Gesperrt bis
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Forschungsvorhaben
Organisationseinheiten
Zeitschriftenheft
Publikationstyp
Zeitschriftenartikel
Publikationsstatus
Published
Erschienen in
Philosophical Psychology. 2016, 29(4), pp. 503-516. ISSN 0951-5089. eISSN 1465-394X. Available under: doi: 10.1080/09515089.2015.1085006
Zusammenfassung

This paper responds to a problem, raised by Martinez (2013), for Millikan's explanation of the interpretability of novel signs in terms of mapping functions. I argue that Martinez's critique is a logically weakened (and hence more difficult to refute) version of Kripke's skeptical argument about rule following. Responding to Martinez requires two things. First, we must correctly understand the role of simplicity and elegance in choosing the correct mapping function for a signaling system. Second, we need to understand that mapping functions are descriptions of the features that determine the content of signs; they do not themselves determine the content of signs. Bearing these facts in mind, Martinez's concern is assuaged. However, we find that this position on the role of mapping functions is not fully consistent with Millikan's (1990) response to Kripke. I modify her response to Kripke and demonstrate that the alterations do not undermine her view.

Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
400 Sprachwissenschaft, Linguistik
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined
Zitieren
ISO 690LEAHY, Brian, 2016. Simplicity and elegance in Millikan’s account of productivity : reply to Martinez. In: Philosophical Psychology. 2016, 29(4), pp. 503-516. ISSN 0951-5089. eISSN 1465-394X. Available under: doi: 10.1080/09515089.2015.1085006
BibTex
@article{Leahy2016Simpl-34931,
  year={2016},
  doi={10.1080/09515089.2015.1085006},
  title={Simplicity and elegance in Millikan’s account of productivity : reply to Martinez},
  number={4},
  volume={29},
  issn={0951-5089},
  journal={Philosophical Psychology},
  pages={503--516},
  author={Leahy, Brian}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/34931">
    <dcterms:title>Simplicity and elegance in Millikan’s account of productivity : reply to Martinez</dcterms:title>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45"/>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/34931"/>
    <dc:creator>Leahy, Brian</dc:creator>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2016-08-03T14:45:23Z</dc:date>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">This paper responds to a problem, raised by Martinez (2013), for Millikan's explanation of the interpretability of novel signs in terms of mapping functions. I argue that Martinez's critique is a logically weakened (and hence more difficult to refute) version of Kripke's skeptical argument about rule following. Responding to Martinez requires two things. First, we must correctly understand the role of simplicity and elegance in choosing the correct mapping function for a signaling system. Second, we need to understand that mapping functions are descriptions of the features that determine the content of signs; they do not themselves determine the content of signs. Bearing these facts in mind, Martinez's concern is assuaged. However, we find that this position on the role of mapping functions is not fully consistent with Millikan's (1990) response to Kripke. I modify her response to Kripke and demonstrate that the alterations do not undermine her view.</dcterms:abstract>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:issued>2016</dcterms:issued>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2016-08-03T14:45:23Z</dcterms:available>
    <dc:contributor>Leahy, Brian</dc:contributor>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
Interner Vermerk
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.
Prüfdatum der URL
Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation
Finanzierungsart
Kommentar zur Publikation
Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Ja
Begutachtet
Diese Publikation teilen