[quickphilosophy] Re: Fodor on Concepts II: First argument against BCP
- From: wittrsl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:02:23 -0000
--- In quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "gabuddabout" <gabuddabout@...> wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Part of the trouble is that the BCP "clan" includes those like Putnam who
> attempt a priori arguments against a possible science of psychology. So a
> big part of the clan have no competing research proposals. Others do and
> historically it is inferring and sorting that have been thought to be the
> basis upon which a theory of concept possession is to be had, for starters.
>
> Does this sound right insofar as it makes sense for Fodor to speak of a clan
> of which he's focussing only on a few members?
>
Hi, Budd. That makes sense to me. But lets say that was his reason, he still
lumps everybody together at his peril.
Put this way: he lumps it and they may not like it. ;>}
W
Other related posts: