Статья 'О двух подходах Дэвида Папино к феноменальным концептам' - журнал 'Философская мысль' - NotaBene.ru
по
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial collegium > Peer-review process > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Online First Pre-Publication > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Open access publishing costs > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy > Editorial board
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

Публикация за 72 часа - теперь это реальность!
При необходимости издательство предоставляет авторам услугу сверхсрочной полноценной публикации. Уже через 72 часа статья появляется в числе опубликованных на сайте издательства с DOI и номерами страниц.
По первому требованию предоставляем все подтверждающие публикацию документы!
MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Philosophical Thought
Reference:

On the Two Approaches to David 's Phenomenal Concepts

Pris' Igor'

Senior Researcher, Institute of Philosophy

220012, Belarus, g. Minsk, ul. Surganova, 1, of. 810

frigpr@gmail.com
Другие публикации этого автора
 

 

DOI:

10.7256/2306-0174.2014.9.13310

Review date:

22-10-2014


Publish date:

05-11-2014


Abstract.

In article evolution of views of David Papineau on phenomenal concepts is considered, and, in particular, two of its are in detail stated the main approach to them (Father's-2002, Father's-2006). The emphasis is placed on property of phenomenal concepts at the same time to mention and use phenomenal experience which is offered to be interpreted in the context of the vittgenshtaynovsky concept "uses" (language game). Within such interpretation the "used" phenomenal experience makes the contribution to the cognitive act. For Papineau, on the contrary, the experience associated with the use of phenomenal concepts allows to explain only existence of illusory intuition about a so-called explanatory failure in psychophysical identities, but in semantic and epistemological meanings is neutral. Similarity between phenomenal concepts and concepts perceptual, and also "similarity" between phenomenal concepts and phenomenal experience, is interpreted in the vittgenshtaynovskikh terms of family similarity. Approach Father's is compared to Ned Blok's approach. At both philosophers the solution of a so-called problem of an explanatory failure contains pragmatical measurement in psychophysical identities. In more general plan evolution of views Father's can be characterized as rapprochement with a pragmatism of vittgenshtaynovsky type which relieves of illusion of existence of an explanatory failure. "The minimum approach" Father's-2014 to concept of a phenomenal concept is limited to introduction of only one essential property of phenomenal concepts – their aprioristic independence of theoretical/scientific concepts that allows to relieve this concept of many standard objections. It is possible to agree with Father's-2014 that in effect, antimaterialistic arguments are based only on aposteriorny nature of psychophysical identities.

This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian here .

References
1.
Alter T. Social Externalism and the Knowledge Argument. Mind , 2013. 122 (486). S. 481-496
2.
Ball D. There Are No Phenomenal Concepts // Mind, 2009. 118 (472). S. 935-962.
3.
Ball D. Consciousness and Conceptual Mastery // Mind, 2013. 122 (486). S. 497-508.First published online: December 7, 2009
4.
Block Ned and Stalnaker Robert. Conceptual Analysis, Dualism, and the Explanatory Gap // Philosophical Review. 1999. 108. S. 1-46.
5.
Block N. Max Black's objection to mind-body identity. // Oxford Review of Metaphysics, 2006. 3.
6.
Chalmers D.J. & Jackson F. Conceptual analysis and reductive explanation. // Philosophical Review, 2001. 110. S. 315-61.
7.
Chalmers D.J. Phenomenal Concepts and the Knowledge Argument / In (P. Ludlow, Y. Nagasawa, & D. Stoljar, eds) There's Something about Mary: Essays on Frank Jackson's Knowledge Argument Against Physicalism. MIT Press, 2004.
8.
Chalmers D.J. Phenomenal Concepts and the Explanatory Gap / In (T. Alter & S. Walter, eds) Phenomenal Concepts and Phenomenal Knowledge: New Essays on Consciousness and Physicalism. Oxford University Pressb 2006.
9.
Jackson F. What Mary Didn’t Know? // Journal of Philosophy. 1986. Tom 83, S. 291-295.
10.
Kripke S. Naming and Necessity. Oxford: Blackwell, 1980.
11.
Hill C. S. Consciousness. Cambridge UP, 2009
12.
Levine J. Materialism and qualia: The explanatory gap // Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 1983. 64. C. 354-61.
13.
Loar B. Phenomenal states // Philosophical Perspectives, 1990. 4. C. 81-108.
14.
Loar B. Phenomenal States II / In Ned Block, Owen Flanagan & Güven Güzeldere (eds.), The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates. The Mit Press, 1997.
15.
Loar B. Transparent experience and the availability of qualia / In Q. Smith and A. Jokic (eds.), Consciousness: New Philosophical Perspectives. Oxford: Clarendon, 2003.
16.
Millikan R. On Clear and Confused Ideas. (New York: Cambridge UP), 2000.
17.
Newen A. Philosophia Naturalis, 2010-11, tom 47-48, nomer 1-2. S 155-183.
18.
Papineau D. Philosophical Naturalism. Basil Blackwell, 1993.
19.
Papineau D. Thinking about Consciousness. Oxford University Press, 2002.
20.
Papineau D. Phenomenal and perceptual concepts / In (T. Alter & S. Walter, eds) Phenomenal Concepts and Phenomenal Knowledge: Essays on Consciousness and Physicalism. Oxford University Press, 2006.
21.
Papineau D. Phenomenal Concepts are not Demonstrative / In MM McCabe and M Textor (eds) Perspectives on Perception. 2007.
22.
Papineau D. What Exactly is the Explanatory Gap? // Philosophia, 2010.
23.
Papineau D. Phenomenal Concepts and the Private Language Argument //American Philosophical Quarterly, 2011. Tom 48, n 2, C. 175 – 184.
24.
Papineau D. The Minimal Phenomenal Concept Strategy / Workshop « Phenomenal concepts », 2014, Paris, le 16 Juin 2014. (Sm. takzhe «The Perspective of the Football Supporter», University of Kent, 19 June 2014)
25.
Perry J. Knowledge, Possibility, and Consciousness. MIT Press, 2001.
26.
Perry J. Précis of Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness. // Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 2004a. LXVIII, No. 1, C. 172-182.
27.
Perry J. Replies. // Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 2004b. Vol. LXVIII, No. 1, C. 207-229.
28.
Prinz M. and Pris F.-I. Phenomenal Concepts are Consistent with Private Language Argument // Pre-Proceedings of the 36 Wittgenstein Conference. Austria. 2013. S. 326-328.
29.
Stoljar, D. Physicalism and phenomenal concepts. Mind and Language, 2005, 20 (2), C. 296-302.
30.
Pris' I.E. Fenomenal'nye kontsepty sovmestimy s vittgenshtainovskim argumentom chastnogo yazyka // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya. - 2014. - 7. - C. 64 - 98. DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2014.7.12468. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_12468.html
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.
"History Illustrated" Website