Reply to Our Critics
نویسندگان
چکیده
Ratte for reading and criticizing our book. Interestingly, their three sets of comments (to which we shall respond in order) reflect three very different standpoints on both vision and the science of vision. 1. Reply to Tim Schroeder Tim Schroeder is a very sympathetic reader indeed. He raises two queries, both of which are well taken and go deep to the heart of our framework. His first question is about the scope and limits of our endorsement of a teleosemantic account of mental representations. On this account, a signal S is said to represent property F if the former has the function to track (or be correlated with) instances of the latter. As Schroeder notes, since this account involves the notion of tracking, it seems tailor-made for belief-like (or " indicative ") mental representations with a mind-to-world direction of fit, whose function is to register the presence of facts or instantiated properties. Indeed, in the first section of Chapter 1, we do endorse this account for the contents of visual percepts. The question Schroeder first raises is whether this teleosemantic account could be extended to the contents of intentions—motor intentions , in particular—which, unlike beliefs and percepts, are " imperative " mental representations with a world-to-mind (not a mind-to-world) direction of fit, i.e., whose function is not to record facts, but to represent non-actual possible states of affairs and to contribute to turning them into actual states of affairs. In particular, we do agree with Schroeder that the problem arises for the content of motor intentions, whose function, as he
منابع مشابه
On Sternberg’s ‘‘Reply to Gottfredson’’
Sternberg disputes not a single point in my critique of his work on practical intelligence. Instead, he discusses his broader theory of successful intelligence and answers self-posed objections from unspecified critics. His discussion exhibits the same problematic mode of argument and use of evidence that my critique had documented: it repeats the unsubstantiated claims that critics question as...
متن کاملReply to Critics
In my reply to critics I address a raft of issues raised by the commentators to Fault Lines of Globalization. These issues include: the radicalization of the Husserlian concept of intentionality as differance; the irreducibility of a-legality to (il)legality; the relation between legal orders and society; legal pluralism; the relation between power and place; contingency and modernity; fear and...
متن کاملMeasurement Uncertainty: Reply to Critics
In a recent publication [PRL 111, 160405 (2013)] we proved a version of Heisenberg’s errordisturbance tradeoff. This result was in apparent contradiction to claims by Ozawa of having refuted these ideas of Heisenberg. In a direct reaction [arXiv:1308.3540] Ozawa has called our work groundless, and has claimed to have found both a counterexample and an error in our proof. Here we answer to these...
متن کاملReply to Critics
Tessman responds to her three critics’ comments on Burdened Virtues, focusing on their concerns with her stipulation of an “inclusivity requirement,” according to which one cannot be said to flourish without contributing to the flourishing of an inclusive collectivity. Tessman identifies a naturalized approach to ethics—which she distinguishes from the naturalism she implicitly endorsed in Burd...
متن کامل