Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Davidson's triangulation argument fails to establish that... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Davidson's triangulation argument fails to establish that genuine thought requires interaction with other minded beings

    Consciousness & MindPhilosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's private language argument shows that normative standards for meaning require only behavioral regularities, not inner mental states in others.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If behavioral dispositions suffice to ground semantic norms, triangulation with functional systems—not genuinely minded beings—establishes objective reference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Davidson's own externalism about content entails that causal-historical relations to the environment, not the mentality of interlocutors, fixes thought content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dretske's informational semantics grounds intentional content in reliable causal covariation with environmental features, requiring no intersubjective confirmation from minded others.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If solitary organisms can develop tracking mechanisms that reliably discriminate stimuli—as Dretske argues—genuine representational content arises without triangulation at all.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Davidson's triangulation argument thus establishes a sufficient but not necessary condition for thought, leaving the core claim about genuine minds undefended.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Davidson's argument requires that the 'others' with whom one triangulates be genuine minded beings
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Thought would be possible even if the others with whom one triangulated were nothing but robots or automata
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageConsciousness & Mind

    Related

    Davidson's argument requires that the 'others' with whom one triangulates be gen...Davidson's own externalism about content entails that causal-historical relation...Davidson's triangulation argument thus establishes a sufficient but not necessar...Dretske's informational semantics grounds intentional content in reliable causal...
    +4 moreShow less
    If behavioral dispositions suffice to ground semantic norms, triangulation with ...If solitary organisms can develop tracking mechanisms that reliably discriminate...Thought would be possible even if the others with whom one triangulated were not...Wittgenstein's private language argument shows that normative standards for mean...

    Similar

    Davidson's argument requires that the 'others' with whom one triangula...86%Having thoughts with content requires triangulation with other thinkin...79%Searle's argument depends for its force on intuitions that certain ent...77%Having thoughts with determinate content requires triangulation with a...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: transcendental-arguments
    View source passageHide passage
    The problem that Stroud has highlighted may be briefly illustrated by returning to the exemplars of transcendental arguments that we considered in Section 1. Thus, when it comes to Kant’s Refutation of Idealism, it can be said that the most that Kant really establishes is that we have experience as of things outside us in space, while all that Strawson’s objectivity argument shows is that we must apply the is/seems distinction to our experience, and so believe that things exist without us experi
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit