Cognitive Phenomenology and Indirect Sense
-
Bradley Richards
Abstract
Acquaintance with the non-sensory cognitive phenomenology of a given intentional content can act as a Fregean sense presenting that content. This provides (i) a mechanism for acquaintance with (a kind of) sense, (ii) a sense that is subject and context invariant, and (iii) a mechanism for the immediate presentation of a referent. This kind of sense can be used to defend Kripke’s acquaintance-based development of Frege’s claim that when a sentence S is embedded in an attitude ascription it refers to the thought that S expresses in that context (and not its unembedded referent, the true).
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Andrew Bailey, Julien Beillard, Mark McCullagh, William Seager, and two anonymous referees for comments on an early draft of this paper.
References
Bailey, A., and B.Richards. 2014. “Horgan and Tienson on Phenomenology and Intentionality.” Philosophical Studies167 (2): 313–26.10.1007/s11098-013-0089-7Suche in Google Scholar
Bayne, T., and M.Montague. 2011. Cognitive Phenomenology. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Block, N.2007. “Consciousness, Accessibility, and the Mesh between Psychology and Neuroscience.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences30 (5): 481–548.10.1017/S0140525X07002786Suche in Google Scholar
Block, N.2011. “Perceptual Consciousness Overflows Cognitive Access.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences15 (12): 567–75. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.11.001.Suche in Google Scholar
Block, N.2014. “Rich Conscious Perception Outside Focal Attention.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences18 (9), 445–47. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.05.007.10.1016/j.tics.2014.05.007Suche in Google Scholar
Burge, T.1979. “Frege and the Hierarchy.” Synthese40 (2): 265–81.10.1007/BF00485680Suche in Google Scholar
Carruthers, P., and B.Veillet. 2011. “The Case against Cognitive Phenomenology.” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 35–56. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0002Suche in Google Scholar
Chalmers, D. J.2002. “The Components of Content.” In Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Reading. New York: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Chalmers, D. J.2004. “The Representational Character of Experience.” In The Future for Philosophy, 153–81. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199247288.003.0007Suche in Google Scholar
Chalmers, D. J.2006. “Perception and the Fall from Eden.” In Perceptual Experience, 49–125. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199289769.003.0003Suche in Google Scholar
Chalmers, D. J.2011. “Propositions and Attitude Ascriptions: A Fregean Account.” Noûs45 (4): 595–639.10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00788.xSuche in Google Scholar
Davidson, D.1965. “Theories of Meaning and Learnable Languages.” In Proceedings of the International Congress for Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science, 383–93. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Suche in Google Scholar
Dretske, F.1995. Naturalizing the Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Frege, G.1948. “Sense and Reference.” Philosophical Review57 (3): 209–30.10.2307/2181485Suche in Google Scholar
Goldman, A.1993. “The Psychology of Folk Psychology.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences16: 15–28.10.1017/S0140525X00028648Suche in Google Scholar
Graham, G., T. E.Horgan, and J. L.Tienson. 2007. “Consciousness and Intentionality.” In The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness, 468–84. Cornwall: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470751466.ch38Suche in Google Scholar
Hasan, A., and R.Fumerton. 2014. “Knowledge by Acquaintance vs. Description.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014), edited by E. N.Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/knowledge-acquaindescrip/. Retrieved 15/08/2014.Suche in Google Scholar
Horgan, T.2011. “From Agentive Phenomenology to Cognitive Phenomenology: A Guide for the Perplexed.” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 57–78. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0003Suche in Google Scholar
Horgan, T., and G.Graham. 2012. “Phenomenal Intentionality and Content Determinacy.” In Prospects for Meaning, 321–44. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110216882.321Suche in Google Scholar
Horgan, T. E., and J. L.Tienson. 2002. “The Intentionality of Phenomenology and the Phenomenology of Intentionality.” In Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings, 520–33. New York: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Kriegel, U.2011. “Cognitive Phenomenology as the Basis of Unconscious Content.” In Cognitive Phenomenology. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0004Suche in Google Scholar
Kriegel, U.2013. “The Phenomenal Intentionality Research Program.” In Phenomenal Intentionality. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199764297.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Kripke, S. A.1980. Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Kripke, S. A.2008. “Frege’s Theory of Sense and Reference: Some Exegetical Notes.” Theoria74 (3): 181–218. doi:10.1111/j.1755-2567.2008.00018.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Levine, J.2011. “On the Phenomenology of Thought.” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 103–20. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0005Suche in Google Scholar
Lycan, W. G.1996. Consciousness and Experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Parsons, T. D.1981. “Frege’s Hierarchies of Indirect Senses and the Paradox of Analysis.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy6 (1): 37–58.10.1111/j.1475-4975.1981.tb00427.xSuche in Google Scholar
Pitt, D.2004. “The Phenomenology of Cognition, or, What Is It Like to Think That _P_?” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research69 (1): 1–36.10.1111/j.1933-1592.2004.tb00382.xSuche in Google Scholar
Pitt, D.2011. “Introspection, Phenomenality, and the Availability of Intentional Content.” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 141–73. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0007Suche in Google Scholar
Prinz, J.2011. “The Sensory Basis of Cognitive Phenomenology.” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 174–96. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0008Suche in Google Scholar
Putnam, H.1975. “The Meaning of ‘Meaning’.” Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science7: 131–93.10.1017/CBO9780511625251.014Suche in Google Scholar
Robinson, W. S.2011. “A Frugal View of Cognitive Phenomenology.” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 197–214. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0009Suche in Google Scholar
Russell, B.1910. “Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society11 (5): 108–28.Suche in Google Scholar
Russell, B.1912. The Problems of Philosophy. London: Williams and Norgate.Suche in Google Scholar
Shields, C.2011. “On Behalf of Cognitive Qualia.” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 215–35. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0010Suche in Google Scholar
Siewert, C.1998. The Significance of Consciousness. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Siewert, C.2011. “Phenomenal Thought.” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 236–67. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0011Suche in Google Scholar
Smith, D. W.2011. “The Phenomenology of Consciously Thinking.” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 345–72. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0015Suche in Google Scholar
Smithies, D.2013a. “The Nature of Cognitive Phenomenology.” Philosophy Compass8 (8): 744–54. doi:10.1111/phc3.12053.Suche in Google Scholar
Smithies, D.2013b. “The Significance of Cognitive Phenomenology.” Philosophy Compass8 (8): 731–43. doi:10.1111/phc3.12056.Suche in Google Scholar
Soames, S.2005. Reference and Description: The Case against Two-Dimensionalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400826452Suche in Google Scholar
Soames, S.2010. Philosophy of Language. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Strawson, G.2010. Mental Reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262513104.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Strawson, G.2011. “Cognitive Phenomenology: Real Life.” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 285–325. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0013Suche in Google Scholar
Tye, M.1995. Ten Problems of Consciousness: A Representational Theory of the Phenomenal Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6712.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Tye, M., and B.Wright. 2011. “Is There a Phenomenology of Thought?” In Cognitive Phenomenology, 326–44. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.003.0014Suche in Google Scholar
©2015 by De Gruyter
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- From Unity to Wholeness
- Do Ontological Categories Exist?
- Cognitive Phenomenology and Indirect Sense
- Animalism and Person Essentialism
- van Inwagen’s Argument for the Existence of Fictional Characters. An Evaluation and Critique
- The Passage of Time
- Natural Properties and Atomicity in Modal Realism
- Book Reviews
- Stephan Krämer: On What There Is For Things To Be: Ontological Commitment and Second-Order Quantification
- Charles Bolyard and Rondo Keele: Later Medieval Metaphysics: Ontology, Language, and Logic
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- From Unity to Wholeness
- Do Ontological Categories Exist?
- Cognitive Phenomenology and Indirect Sense
- Animalism and Person Essentialism
- van Inwagen’s Argument for the Existence of Fictional Characters. An Evaluation and Critique
- The Passage of Time
- Natural Properties and Atomicity in Modal Realism
- Book Reviews
- Stephan Krämer: On What There Is For Things To Be: Ontological Commitment and Second-Order Quantification
- Charles Bolyard and Rondo Keele: Later Medieval Metaphysics: Ontology, Language, and Logic