Pub Date : 2009-09-30DOI: 10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042676
F. Keijzer
Embodied cognition has come of age and is now diversifying. In this paper, I discuss four different approaches within embodied cognition: a biogenic approach, an enactive approach, a sensorimotor approach and a scaffolding approach. The four approaches can be differentiated according to their commitments to either biology (biogenic and enactive approaches) and/or experience (enactive and sensorimotor approaches). I will argue that these differences are substantial, but that a reconciliation is possible and even desirable. Seen in this light, embodied cognition can remain a comparatively unified field, these diverging approaches notwithstanding.
{"title":"Trends in belichaamde cognitie : Spanningen rondom biologie en bewuste ervaring","authors":"F. Keijzer","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042676","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042676","url":null,"abstract":"Embodied cognition has come of age and is now diversifying. In this paper, I discuss four different approaches within embodied cognition: a biogenic approach, an enactive approach, a sensorimotor approach and a scaffolding approach. The four approaches can be differentiated according to their commitments to either biology (biogenic and enactive approaches) and/or experience (enactive and sensorimotor approaches). I will argue that these differences are substantial, but that a reconciliation is possible and even desirable. Seen in this light, embodied cognition can remain a comparatively unified field, these diverging approaches notwithstanding.","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":"25 4 1","pages":"499-527"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2009-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79684788","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-09-30DOI: 10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042677
B. Bruin
This paper offers a new view of doxastic voluntarism, epistemic agency and doxastic responsibility. It assumes the perspective of political freedom and uses the stit-theoretic framework from modal logic to investigate the obstacles that other individuals could place in the way of the adoption of beliefs and the formation of knowledge. Interference with someone adopting a belief takes the form of physical and chemical influence on a person's brain, either directly by medication or transcranial magnetic stimulation, or indirectly by sleep deprivation, induced stress, etc. Interference with someone forming knowledge about a proposition takes place at the levels of (i) investigative actions (I bar your access to the library), (ii) adoption of relevant belief, and (iii) the connection between the investigative actions and belief adoption (framing effects ensure systematic biases in ways that individuals use information from news shows). Institutional conclusions are discussed, especially with respect to epistemic paternalism.
{"title":"Doxastische en epistemische vrijheid","authors":"B. Bruin","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042677","url":null,"abstract":"This paper offers a new view of doxastic voluntarism, epistemic agency and doxastic responsibility. It assumes the perspective of political freedom and uses the stit-theoretic framework from modal logic to investigate the obstacles that other individuals could place in the way of the adoption of beliefs and the formation of knowledge. Interference with someone adopting a belief takes the form of physical and chemical influence on a person's brain, either directly by medication or transcranial magnetic stimulation, or indirectly by sleep deprivation, induced stress, etc. Interference with someone forming knowledge about a proposition takes place at the levels of (i) investigative actions (I bar your access to the library), (ii) adoption of relevant belief, and (iii) the connection between the investigative actions and belief adoption (framing effects ensure systematic biases in ways that individuals use information from news shows). Institutional conclusions are discussed, especially with respect to epistemic paternalism.","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":"7 1","pages":"529-552"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2009-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83168316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-09-30DOI: 10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042678
Allard Tamminga
{"title":"In de ban van de metafysica: De identiteitstheorieën van Place, Smart en Armstrong","authors":"Allard Tamminga","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042678","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042678","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":"13 1","pages":"553-575"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2009-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75132380","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-09-01DOI: 10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042675
K. Boer
Throughout the twentieth century, critical philosophy has proceeded by confronting a particular position by a criterion that it considered to be contained within itself This method has been extremely productive. I argue, however, that it relies on a tension between particularity and universality the implications of which have not been sufficiently acknowledged. In order to expose this tension I go back to the roots of this method in modern philosophy, that is, to Kant's first Critique and Hegel's essay entitled 'On the Essence of Philosophical Critique as Such and its Relation to the Present State of Philosophy in Particular' (1802). The fact that Kant and Hegel drew most divergent criteria from what they considered to be pure reason seems to compromise not merely their universality, but also their alleged immanence in the philosophical systems under critique. Even though the method initiated by Kant and Hegel is haunted by the tension between particularity and universality, I do not wish to suggest that the idea of immanent critique should be abandoned altogether. Contemporary critical philosophy should rather affirm that paradigms tend to conceive of their own particular principles as universal, and by that very gesture - the essence of ideology - tend to oppose themselves to contrary paradigms.
{"title":"Kant, Hegel, en het begrip ‘immanente kritiek’ in de moderne filosofie","authors":"K. Boer","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042675","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.3.2042675","url":null,"abstract":"Throughout the twentieth century, critical philosophy has proceeded by confronting a particular position by a criterion that it considered to be contained within itself This method has been extremely productive. I argue, however, that it relies on a tension between particularity and universality the implications of which have not been sufficiently acknowledged. In order to expose this tension I go back to the roots of this method in modern philosophy, that is, to Kant's first Critique and Hegel's essay entitled 'On the Essence of Philosophical Critique as Such and its Relation to the Present State of Philosophy in Particular' (1802). The fact that Kant and Hegel drew most divergent criteria from what they considered to be pure reason seems to compromise not merely their universality, but also their alleged immanence in the philosophical systems under critique. Even though the method initiated by Kant and Hegel is haunted by the tension between particularity and universality, I do not wish to suggest that the idea of immanent critique should be abandoned altogether. Contemporary critical philosophy should rather affirm that paradigms tend to conceive of their own particular principles as universal, and by that very gesture - the essence of ideology - tend to oppose themselves to contrary paradigms.","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":"41 1","pages":"475-498"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2009-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79061236","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-08-18DOI: 10.2143/TVF.71.1.2036179
Caterina Marchionni, J. Vromen
The behavioral sciences are characterized by a plurality of distinct forms of explanation. Ernst Mayrs (1961) famous distinction between ultimate and proximate explanations is sometimes invoked to make sense of part of this plurality. Whereas evolutionary theorizing explains human behavior by appealing to evolutionary forces working in the past (natural selection being the notable example), proximate explanations explain it by appealing to current cognitive and psychological mechanisms. Despite the widespread use of this distinction by both philosophers and scientists, its precise content remains unclear. Those philosophers who have examined the distinction have not reached a consensus on the kind of explanations that ultimate explanations are, nor how they relate to proximate explanations (Ariew 2003, Beatty 1 994,
{"title":"The Ultimate/Proximate Distinction in Recent Accounts of Human Cooperation","authors":"Caterina Marchionni, J. Vromen","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.1.2036179","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.1.2036179","url":null,"abstract":"The behavioral sciences are characterized by a plurality of distinct forms of explanation. Ernst Mayrs (1961) famous distinction between ultimate and proximate explanations is sometimes invoked to make sense of part of this plurality. Whereas evolutionary theorizing explains human behavior by appealing to evolutionary forces working in the past (natural selection being the notable example), proximate explanations explain it by appealing to current cognitive and psychological mechanisms. Despite the widespread use of this distinction by both philosophers and scientists, its precise content remains unclear. Those philosophers who have examined the distinction have not reached a consensus on the kind of explanations that ultimate explanations are, nor how they relate to proximate explanations (Ariew 2003, Beatty 1 994,","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":"33 11 1","pages":"87-117"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2009-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82772192","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-06-30DOI: 10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038077
D. Wiggins
This is the text of The Lindley Lecture for 2008, given by David Wiggins, a British philosopher.
这是2008年林德利讲座的内容，由英国哲学家大卫·威金斯(David Wiggins)讲授。
{"title":"SOLIDARITY AND THE ROOT OF THE ETHICAL","authors":"D. Wiggins","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038077","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038077","url":null,"abstract":"This is the text of The Lindley Lecture for 2008, given by David Wiggins, a British philosopher.","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":"12 1","pages":"239-269"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2009-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89824820","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-06-30DOI: 10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038079
G. V. D. Heiden
{"title":"De toe-eigening van het oorspronkelijke en het eigene","authors":"G. V. D. Heiden","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038079","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038079","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":"1 1","pages":"305-329"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2009-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79844898","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-06-30DOI: 10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038108
Carine Defoort
{"title":"In memoriam Patricia De Martelaere","authors":"Carine Defoort","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038108","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":"46 1","pages":"447-450"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2009-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86703115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-06-01DOI: 10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038080
P. Loobuyck, S. Rummens
Recently, Jurgen Habermas has joined the debate on the acceptability of religious reasons in the public debate. Discussing both the exclusionist position of Robert Audi and the inclusionist position of Nicholas Wolterstorff, Habermas ultimately advocates a middle ground position which, in many respects, resembles the view of John Rawls. In this paper, we analyze the specificity of Habermas's account of the post-secular public sphere and situate his current views in the larger context of his work. In the final sections, we argue that Habermas, in spite of his increasingly open stance towards religion, still fails to fully appreciate the proper nature of religious faith and, therefore, still underestimates the presumably ineliminable tension between public reason and religion.
{"title":"De uitdaging van het postseculiere perspectief. Jürgen Habermas over religie en de publieke rede","authors":"P. Loobuyck, S. Rummens","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038080","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038080","url":null,"abstract":"Recently, Jurgen Habermas has joined the debate on the acceptability of religious reasons in the public debate. Discussing both the exclusionist position of Robert Audi and the inclusionist position of Nicholas Wolterstorff, Habermas ultimately advocates a middle ground position which, in many respects, resembles the view of John Rawls. In this paper, we analyze the specificity of Habermas's account of the post-secular public sphere and situate his current views in the larger context of his work. In the final sections, we argue that Habermas, in spite of his increasingly open stance towards religion, still fails to fully appreciate the proper nature of religious faith and, therefore, still underestimates the presumably ineliminable tension between public reason and religion.","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":"40 1","pages":"331-360"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2009-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83934513","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-06-01DOI: 10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038078
T. Jacobs
{"title":"Kant, Kafka en de ambiguïteit van de wet. Tussen de Scylla van het legalisme en de Charybdis van de zuivere terreur","authors":"T. Jacobs","doi":"10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.71.2.2038078","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":"102 1","pages":"271-303"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2009-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86778032","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：