02.11.2012 Views

Reduction and Elimination in Philosophy and the Sciences

Reduction and Elimination in Philosophy and the Sciences

Reduction and Elimination in Philosophy and the Sciences

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

oute to <strong>the</strong>ory reduction besides functional def<strong>in</strong>itions of<br />

<strong>the</strong> higher-level properties. Still it might be thought that <strong>the</strong><br />

sentences-<strong>in</strong>-<strong>the</strong>-head view, as well as teleosemantics,<br />

might facilitate reduction through m<strong>in</strong>d-body identity. But I<br />

th<strong>in</strong>k <strong>the</strong>re are difficulties for this project, too. <strong>Reduction</strong><br />

through identity is supposed to be based on an empirical<br />

discovery to <strong>the</strong> effect that some higher-level phenomenon<br />

is <strong>in</strong> fact identical with some lower-level phenomenon, as<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> case of water = H2O. But <strong>the</strong> water = H2O identity<br />

rests precisely on <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> characteristics of water<br />

can be expla<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> terms of water be<strong>in</strong>g H2O. And <strong>the</strong><br />

normativity argument shows that similar explanation of <strong>the</strong><br />

characteristics of <strong>in</strong>tentional states <strong>in</strong> terms of bra<strong>in</strong> states<br />

is not to be expected. The purpose of <strong>the</strong>se remarks on<br />

<strong>the</strong>ory reduction <strong>and</strong> reduction through identity has been<br />

merely to h<strong>in</strong>t at <strong>the</strong> direction where I th<strong>in</strong>k <strong>the</strong> problems<br />

are, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>y are not <strong>in</strong>tended to be at all conclusive.<br />

140<br />

Rule-Follow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Irreducibility of Intentional States — Antti Heik<strong>in</strong>heimo<br />

Literature<br />

Dretske, Fred 2006 “Representation, Teleosemantics, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

Problem of Self-Knowledge” <strong>in</strong>: Graham MacDonald <strong>and</strong> David<br />

Pap<strong>in</strong>eau (eds.), Teleosemantics, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 69-<br />

84.<br />

Fodor, Jerry 1976 Language of Thought, Hassocks: Harvester<br />

Press.<br />

Kim, Jaegwon 2005 Physicalism, or Someth<strong>in</strong>g near Enough,<br />

Pr<strong>in</strong>ceton: Pr<strong>in</strong>ceton University Press.<br />

Kripke, Saul A. 1982 Wittgenste<strong>in</strong> on Rules <strong>and</strong> Private Language,<br />

Cambridge: Harvard University Press.<br />

Kusch, Mart<strong>in</strong> 2006 A Sceptical Guide to Mean<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> Rules,<br />

Chesham: Acumen.<br />

Millikan, Ruth Garrett 1984 Language, Thought, <strong>and</strong> O<strong>the</strong>r Biological<br />

Categories, Cambridge: M.I.T. Press<br />

Qu<strong>in</strong>e, Willard Van Orman 1960 Word <strong>and</strong> Object, Cambridge:<br />

Technology Press of <strong>the</strong> M.I.T.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!