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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Fodor's appropriation of the term conflates two distinct ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Fodor's use of the label 'individualism' for methodological individualism is misleading.

    Fodor's appropriation of the term conflates two distinct doctrines: explanatory reductionism and narrow content internalism.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Explanatory reductionism claims mental states reduce to physical processes; narrow internalism claims content depends only on intrinsic brain states.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.One can accept narrow internalism while rejecting reductionism: content could be intrinsic yet remain explanatorily irreducible to physics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Fodor uses 'internalism' ambiguously to mean both a metaphysical thesis about content-location and an explanatory thesis about reduction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Narrow internalism logically entails explanatory reductionism: if content is intrinsic to brains, physical explanations suffice for mental phenomena.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Fodor explicitly distinguishes these doctrines himself in multiple texts, suggesting the conflation charge misreads his actual position.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim requires independent argument that these doctrines are genuinely separable, not merely verbally distinct formulations of one thesis.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Consciousness & Mind1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Explanatory reductionism claims mental states reduce to physical processes; narr...Fodor explicitly distinguishes these doctrines himself in multiple texts, sugges...Fodor uses 'internalism' ambiguously to mean both a metaphysical thesis about co...Fodor's use of the label 'individualism' for methodological individualism is mis...
    +3 moreShow less
    Narrow internalism logically entails explanatory reductionism: if content is int...One can accept narrow internalism while rejecting reductionism: content could be...The claim requires independent argument that these doctrines are genuinely separ...

    Details

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