文明的进步和de dicto/de re的区别

IF 0.2 0 PHILOSOPHY HYBRIS Revista de Filosofia Pub Date : 2021-12-30 DOI:10.18778/1689-4286.54.02
M. Ebner
{"title":"文明的进步和de dicto/de re的区别","authors":"M. Ebner","doi":"10.18778/1689-4286.54.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper I present my own argument in support of the thesis that de dicto beliefs are, in at least one sense, more basic than de re beliefs. This argument rests on the fact of the progress of civilization, which appears, as I try to demonstrate, not to be possible without de dicto beliefs constituting a key part of the mental processes of the inventor. My argument is to counterweigh the force of Tyler Burge’s argument for the fundamentality of de re beliefs, leading to the conclusion that beliefs de re are a necessary condition of language understanding and having propositional attitudes at all (Burge 1977, p. 347-348). The first part of the paper is devoted to the examination of the structure of different versions of transcendental arguments – objective and subjective, the second part focuses on an analysis of Burge’s argument from language understanding, while the aim of the third part is to present the Reader with the argument from the progress of civilization. The exposition of the argument is followed by a discussion of certain possible objections which the argument may face. ","PeriodicalId":30478,"journal":{"name":"HYBRIS Revista de Filosofia","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The progress of civilization and the de dicto/de re distinction\",\"authors\":\"M. Ebner\",\"doi\":\"10.18778/1689-4286.54.02\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper I present my own argument in support of the thesis that de dicto beliefs are, in at least one sense, more basic than de re beliefs. This argument rests on the fact of the progress of civilization, which appears, as I try to demonstrate, not to be possible without de dicto beliefs constituting a key part of the mental processes of the inventor. My argument is to counterweigh the force of Tyler Burge’s argument for the fundamentality of de re beliefs, leading to the conclusion that beliefs de re are a necessary condition of language understanding and having propositional attitudes at all (Burge 1977, p. 347-348). The first part of the paper is devoted to the examination of the structure of different versions of transcendental arguments – objective and subjective, the second part focuses on an analysis of Burge’s argument from language understanding, while the aim of the third part is to present the Reader with the argument from the progress of civilization. The exposition of the argument is followed by a discussion of certain possible objections which the argument may face. \",\"PeriodicalId\":30478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HYBRIS Revista de Filosofia\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HYBRIS Revista de Filosofia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18778/1689-4286.54.02\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HYBRIS Revista de Filosofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/1689-4286.54.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇论文中,我提出了我自己的论点,以支持这样一个论点,即从某种意义上说,de dicto信念比de re信念更基本。这一论点建立在文明进步的事实之上,正如我试图证明的那样,如果没有构成发明者心理过程关键部分的主观信念,文明进步似乎是不可能的。我的论点是要抵消泰勒·伯格关于“信仰的本质”的论点的力量,从而得出结论,即“信仰的本质”是语言理解和拥有命题态度的必要条件(伯格1977,第347-348页)。本文的第一部分致力于考察客观和主观先验论证的不同版本的结构,第二部分侧重于从语言理解的角度分析伯格的论证,而第三部分的目的是向读者展示来自文明进步的论证。对论证的阐述之后是对论证可能面临的某些反对意见的讨论。
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
The progress of civilization and the de dicto/de re distinction
In this paper I present my own argument in support of the thesis that de dicto beliefs are, in at least one sense, more basic than de re beliefs. This argument rests on the fact of the progress of civilization, which appears, as I try to demonstrate, not to be possible without de dicto beliefs constituting a key part of the mental processes of the inventor. My argument is to counterweigh the force of Tyler Burge’s argument for the fundamentality of de re beliefs, leading to the conclusion that beliefs de re are a necessary condition of language understanding and having propositional attitudes at all (Burge 1977, p. 347-348). The first part of the paper is devoted to the examination of the structure of different versions of transcendental arguments – objective and subjective, the second part focuses on an analysis of Burge’s argument from language understanding, while the aim of the third part is to present the Reader with the argument from the progress of civilization. The exposition of the argument is followed by a discussion of certain possible objections which the argument may face. 
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Teologiczne konsekwencje darwinizmu — „Bóg Darwina” Corneliusa G. Huntera Co to za świat? The Limits of Liberalism. Tradition, Individualism, and the crisis of freedom, Mark. T. Mitchell, University of Notre Dame Press, Indiana 2019, ss. 328 – Artykuł Recenzyjny Teoria interpretacji Paula Ricoeura i Hansa-Georga Gadamera. Analiza porównawcza Ideologia w edukacji. Spojrzenie opisowe, negatywne i pozytywne na przykładzie wybranych stanowisk pedagogiki katolickiej i krytycznej
×
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