Remarks on Fodor on having concepts

Mind and Language 19 (1):48-56 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Fodor offers a novel argument against Bare-bones Concept Pragmatism (BCP). He alleges that there are two circularities in BCP’s account of concept possession: a circularity in explaining concept possession in terms of the capacity to sort; and a circularity in explaining concept possession in terms of the capacity to draw inferences. We argue that neither of these circles is real.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 138,906

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
419 (#118,289)

6 months
45 (#191,601)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Daniel Weiskopf
Georgia State University
William Bechtel
University of California, San Diego

Citations of this work

Robert Brandom.Jeremy Wanderer - 2008 - Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
Primitive Concepts and the Ontological Question.Bernardo Pino - 2024 - Eidos: Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad Del Norte 41:232-269.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

A Study of Concepts.Christopher Peacocke - 1992 - Studia Logica 54 (1):132-133.
Concepts: a potboiler.Jerry Fodor - 1994 - Cognition 50 (1-3):95-113.
Concepts; A Potboiler.Jerry A. Fodor - 1995 - Philosophical Issues 6:1-24.

View all 8 references / Add more references