Files in this item
Concepts in context
Item metadata
dc.contributor.advisor | Cappelen, Herman | |
dc.contributor.advisor | Brown, Jessica (Jessica Anne) | |
dc.contributor.advisor | Récanati, François | |
dc.contributor.author | Onofri, Andrea | |
dc.coverage.spatial | 243 | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2013-04-03T11:39:53Z | |
dc.date.available | 2013-04-03T11:39:53Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2013 | |
dc.identifier | uk.bl.ethos.570551 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10023/3462 | |
dc.description.abstract | My thesis tackles two related problems that have taken center stage in the recent literature on concepts: • What are the individuation conditions of concepts? Under what conditions is a concept C₁ the same concept as a concept C₂? • What are the possession conditions of concepts? What conditions must be satisfied for a thinker to have a concept C? I will develop a pluralist and contextualist theory of concept individuation and possession: different concepts have different individuation and possession conditions, and contextual factors play a crucial role in determining what concepts we attribute to other subjects when we ascribe propositional attitudes to them. In chapters 1-3, I defend a contextualist, non-Millian theory of propositional attitude ascriptions. Then, I suggest contextualist theories of ascriptions can be applied to the problem of concept individuation/possession. In particular, I use contextualism to provide a new, more effective argument for Fodor’s “publicity principle”, according to which concepts must be shared in order for interpersonally applicable psychological generalizations to be possible. Publicity has important implications: in particular, it is inconsistent with existing versions of holism, on which concepts cannot be shared by ordinary thinkers. Nonetheless, in chapters 4-5 I show how holism can still play an important role in our best theory of concepts. More specifically, I argue that the tradition of appealing to modes of presentation in order to give an account of “Frege cases” is in fact committed to holism. To develop a version of holism that will give a successful account of Frege cases without violating publicity, I suggest we should adopt my pluralist-contextualist picture: on that picture, the concepts involved in a Frege case will be holistically individuated and not public, while other concepts will be more coarsely individuated and widely shared. In chapter 6, I will develop this view further by contrasting it with other pluralist theories (Weiskopf) and with rival theories of concepts, such as the localist views defended by Peacocke, Rey and Jackson. | en |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | University of St Andrews | |
dc.subject | Concept individuation | en_US |
dc.subject | Concept possession | en_US |
dc.subject | Mental content | en_US |
dc.subject | Publicity | en_US |
dc.subject | Frege cases | en_US |
dc.subject | Psychological explanation | en_US |
dc.subject | Modes of presentation | en_US |
dc.subject | Holism | en_US |
dc.subject | Localism | en_US |
dc.subject | Atomism | en_US |
dc.subject | Pluralism | en_US |
dc.subject | Attitude reports | en_US |
dc.subject | Millianism | en_US |
dc.subject | Contextualism | en_US |
dc.subject.lcc | BD181.O66 | |
dc.subject.lcsh | Concepts | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Contextualism (Philosophy) | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Individuation (Philosophy) | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Pluralism | en_US |
dc.title | Concepts in context | en_US |
dc.type | Thesis | en_US |
dc.contributor.sponsor | Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) | en_US |
dc.type.qualificationlevel | Doctoral | en_US |
dc.type.qualificationname | PhD Doctor of Philosophy | en_US |
dc.publisher.institution | The University of St Andrews | en_US |
dc.publisher.department | Arché Philosophical Research Centre | en_US |
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.