Seminar Paper
—-
What’s it all about then? Something to do with the meta-philosophical aspects of McDowell’s Mind and World. In particular I think I’ll be looking at the way in which it can be compared with Wittgenstein’s metaphilosophy.
Bruin was of the opinion that he has diverged significantly from Witt.; both in his use of Rorty’s concept of a “picture” and in his attempt to give an historical justification for his meta-philosophical position.
—-
Next Steps - Turn Seminar Paper Draft 2 into draft 3 — rework depictions of Witt and Rorty — give a more solid basis for McDowell’s move towards theorising — check up on Larmore response quote — rework second tension section — rework bit about equivalence of linguistic and historical analyses
—-
Writing Process
—-
Points For Seminar
Our knowledge of our perceptual environment - Lately I’ve been trying to get to grips with the idea that our knowledge of the how…there linking rules (i.e. the way in which our perceptions should change as we move through our environment) depends in some way upon our knowledge of perceptual reality - I guess I’m little confused over the status of this additional perceptual “rule” content — a particular issue s that being able grasp what “rules” come bundled with any given perception seems to require that one has knowledge of the environment within which the perception occurs — does this then mean that our perception of reality is mind-dependent in the sense that our knowledge of additional perceptual “rule” content is dependent upon us having sufficient knowledge of the perceptual environment in order to derive the “rule”? — For example, consider someone who doesn’t have knowledge of the optical properties of water and perceives a ‘bent’ stick half submerged in the water. If that person removes the stick from the water and discovers it to be straight should they judge their initial perceptual experience of the ‘bent’ stick to be non-veridical or should they judge themselves to have discovered a new aspect to the linkage “rules”? — Does this highlight a more general problem regarding the link between non-veridical perceptual experience and incomplete knowledge of the linkage “rules”?
Brain’s in vats - Bruin’s response to the brain in a vat problem seemed to be that we could be sure that we weren’t a brain in a vat because we can check whether our supposed perceptions contained these sort of rules — I don’t think I really understand this response (hopefully I can get Bruin to run through it again on Tuesday) — is the argument that veridical and non-veridical perceptions are separated by whether or not their associated “rules” check out? — but couldn’t someone who was worried about brains in vats or hallucinations respond that perhaps the new perceptions that occur in our testing procedure are just electrical stimulations/hallucinations too? — or perhaps the argument is that non-veridical perceptions do not have these associated rules? — this interpretation doesn’t seem to fit with the bush mistaken for a person example however
Older topics - Is there a relationship between Fichte and Davidson in terms of the need for the existence of other rational beings in order to have consciousness? (Discussion moved to Fichte And Davidson 18/05/08.)
—-
- Mc Dowell’s Argument* {[green An attempt to gather together all the parts of McDowell’s system. I’ve tried to make some initial stabs at most of the topics below (missing most of the subtleties I’m sure) but please feel free to tear apart/replace anything I’ve written (I’m going to take another pass at things tonight (10/4) when I actually have access to my notes). Chris ]}
Mc Dowell Problem What exactly is the overall philosophical problem that Mc Dowell is trying to deal with?
Mc Dowell Dilemma What is the dilemma that Mc Dowell hopes to show us a path around?
Mc Dowell Naturalism How does naturalism fit into McDowell’s picture?
Mc Dowell Second Nature What is this second nature thing and how does it fit in?
Mc Dowell Role Of History How does Mc Dowell call upon historical evidence in the course of his argument?
Mc Dowell Position What exactly is McDowell’s position regarding the philosophical problem above?
Mc Dowell Kant Idealism How does Kant fit in and how does Mc Dowell try to avoid idealism?
Mc Dowell Metaphilosophy What can we say about McDowell’s approach to philosophy in general?
Mc Dowell Rational Animals Attempting to distinguish the human from the non-human.
Contributing (non - Mc Dowellian) arguments
Myth Of The Given Giving us exculpations rather than reasons for beliefs.
Davidsonian Coherentism Leaving us spinning in the void.
Wittgenstein Philosophy As Therapy Dissolving anxieties through the wonder of language.
Rorty Mirror Of Nature Placing traditional philosophy in a broader context.
—-
Related papers
Price Mind And World Price’s review to which McD responded.
—-