性格主义者对维特根斯坦-克里普克关于规则意义和遵循的问题的回答

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY CRITICA-REVISTA HISPANOAMERICANA DE FILOSOFIA Pub Date : 2016-10-31 DOI:10.22201/IIFS.18704905E.2016.216
M. Otero
{"title":"性格主义者对维特根斯坦-克里普克关于规则意义和遵循的问题的回答","authors":"M. Otero","doi":"10.22201/IIFS.18704905E.2016.216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Kripke formulates four objections to a simple dispositional solution to the Wittgenstenian rule-following puzzle. I present here two partially dispositional proposals, which are different from the simple view discussed by Kripke, and argue that they are not affected by his four objections to it. One of the two proposals may be attributed, although precautiously, to Wittgenstein himself. The other one, which I prefer, invokes a teleological notion of disposition. The two proposals rely on the concept of simplicity, or —alternatively— the concept of natural similarity. Some Kripkean criticisms of the use of such concepts to solve the rule-following problem are rejected.","PeriodicalId":43820,"journal":{"name":"CRITICA-REVISTA HISPANOAMERICANA DE FILOSOFIA","volume":"14 1","pages":"21-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Respuestas disposicionalistas al problema wittgensteiniano-kripkeano sobre el significado y el seguimiento de reglas\",\"authors\":\"M. Otero\",\"doi\":\"10.22201/IIFS.18704905E.2016.216\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Kripke formulates four objections to a simple dispositional solution to the Wittgenstenian rule-following puzzle. I present here two partially dispositional proposals, which are different from the simple view discussed by Kripke, and argue that they are not affected by his four objections to it. One of the two proposals may be attributed, although precautiously, to Wittgenstein himself. The other one, which I prefer, invokes a teleological notion of disposition. The two proposals rely on the concept of simplicity, or —alternatively— the concept of natural similarity. Some Kripkean criticisms of the use of such concepts to solve the rule-following problem are rejected.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43820,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CRITICA-REVISTA HISPANOAMERICANA DE FILOSOFIA\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"21-45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CRITICA-REVISTA HISPANOAMERICANA DE FILOSOFIA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22201/IIFS.18704905E.2016.216\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CRITICA-REVISTA HISPANOAMERICANA DE FILOSOFIA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22201/IIFS.18704905E.2016.216","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

克里普克对维特根斯坦规则遵循难题的简单处置解决方案提出了四个反对意见。我在这里提出两个部分倾向的建议,它们不同于克里普克所讨论的简单观点,并认为它们不受他的四个反对意见的影响。这两个建议中的一个可以归因于维特根斯坦本人,尽管这是谨慎的。另一个,我更喜欢,用目的论的观点来解释意向。这两种建议依赖于简单性的概念,或者——或者——自然相似性的概念。克里普金对使用这些概念来解决规则遵循问题的一些批评被拒绝了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Respuestas disposicionalistas al problema wittgensteiniano-kripkeano sobre el significado y el seguimiento de reglas
Kripke formulates four objections to a simple dispositional solution to the Wittgenstenian rule-following puzzle. I present here two partially dispositional proposals, which are different from the simple view discussed by Kripke, and argue that they are not affected by his four objections to it. One of the two proposals may be attributed, although precautiously, to Wittgenstein himself. The other one, which I prefer, invokes a teleological notion of disposition. The two proposals rely on the concept of simplicity, or —alternatively— the concept of natural similarity. Some Kripkean criticisms of the use of such concepts to solve the rule-following problem are rejected.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Aesthetics of Food Porn Food, Art and Philosophy Can Food Be Art in Virtue of Its Savour Alone? Meals, Art and Meaning Términos peyorativos de grupo, estereotipos y actos de habla
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1