[Wittrs] Re: The Self-Refuting Argument

  • From: "Cayuse" <z.z7@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 18:50:51 -0000

jrstern wrote:
I think that's (way) too strong.

"Hi, I'm Josh!" refers to me as the agent of action,
even if all it does is stick a label on me.

There are all kinds of indexical statements that would
seem nonproblematic, although their apparent reference is to
some abstraction.  "I like pretty flowers".

It's not the agency, or even the experiencer,
it's a failure to ground these kinds of terms in physicalism.

(or, if you're an orthodox Wittgensteinian, failure to in some
other way ground the terms, or their particular usages, in your
favorite methodology)

Thus we recognize the value of these "folk" terms,
without being misled by their reification.

As long as the term "agent of action" is not considered to refer to some metaphysical agent "beyond" the data of experience then it is unproblematic, but that unproblematic use has never been the target of my comments in this debate. The physical organism in the world may be designated the "agent of action" without implicating the metaphysical issue of free will that I'm taking issue with.
==========================================

Manage Your AMR subscription: //www.freelists.org/list/wittrsamr
For all your Wittrs needs: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

Other related posts: