Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:16:55.175Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Norms, History and the Mental

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2010

Fred Dretske
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Many people think the mind evolved. Some of them think it had to evolve. They think the mind not only has a history, but a history essential to its very existence.

Type
Papers
Information
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements , Volume 49 , March 2001 , pp. 87 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, F. & Aizawa, K. 1994a. ‘Fodorian Semantics’, in Stich, S. and Warfield, T. (eds) (Oxford: Basil Blackwell), pp. 223–42.Google Scholar
Adams, F. & Aizawa, K. 1994b. ‘“X” means X: Fodor/Warfield Semantics’, Minds and Machine, 4, 215–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, F. & Aizawa, K. 1997: ‘Rock beats scissors: historicalism fights back’, Analysis, 57, 273–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedau, M. 1993. ‘Naturalism and Teleology’, in Wagner, S. J. and Warner, R. (eds) (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press), pp. 23–51.Google Scholar
Bogdan, R. (ed.) 1986. Belief: Form, Content, and Function (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Brandom, R. 1994 Making it Explicit (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press)Google Scholar
Davidson, D. 1987. ‘Knowing one's own mind’, Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 60, 441–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dretske, F. 1986. ‘Misrepresentation’, in Bogdan, R. (1986), pp. 17–36.Google Scholar
Dretske, F. 1995. Naturalizing the Mind (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).Google Scholar
Fodor, J. 1990. A Theory of Content and Other Essays (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).Google Scholar
Fodor, J. 1996. ‘Deconstructing Dennett's Darwin’, Mind and Language, 11.3, 246–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbard, A. 1990. Wise Choices, Apt Feelings (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, N. R. 1958. Patterns of Discovery (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Kripke, S. 1982. Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language (Oxford: Blackwell).Google Scholar
Lycan, W. 1996. Consciousness and Experience (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).Google Scholar
MacDonald, G. 1989. ‘Biology and representation’, Mind and Language, 4.3, 186–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthen, M. 1997. ‘Teleology and the product analogy’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 75.1, 21–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millikan, R. 1984. Language, Thought, and Other Biological Categories (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millikan, R. 1993a. White Queen Psychology and Other Essays for Alice (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).Google Scholar
Millikan, R. 1993b. ‘Introduction’, to Millikan (1993a) (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 3–12.Google Scholar
Neander, K. 1995. ‘Misrepresenting and malfunctioning’, Philosophical Studies, 79, 109–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papineau, D. 1993. Philosophical Naturalism (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).Google Scholar
Peacocke, C. 1992.A Study of Concepts (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).Google Scholar
Stich, S. and Warfield, T. (eds) 1994, Mental Representations (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).Google Scholar
Tye, M. 1995. Ten Problems of Consciousness (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velleman, J. D. 1989. Practical Reflection (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Velleman, J. D. 1998. ‘How Belief Aims at the Truth’, paper read at the 1998 Chapel Hill Philosophy Colloquium.Google Scholar
Wagner, S. J. and Warner, R. (eds) 1993. Naturalism: A Critical Appraisal (Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press).Google Scholar
Williams, B. 1973. Deciding to Believe: in Problems of the Self (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press), pp. 136–51.Google Scholar