PrincipiaPub Date : 2022-08-19DOI: 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e78054
Anyerson Stiths Gómez Tabares
{"title":"¿Es la Lectura de Mentes una Capacidad Unimodal?","authors":"Anyerson Stiths Gómez Tabares","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e78054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e78054","url":null,"abstract":"En la discusión de la teoría de la mente hay dos enfoques que han intentado explicar la atribución de estados psicológicos: la teoría-teoría (TT) y la teoría de la simulación (TS). El rasgo distintivo de ambos enfoques es que defienden un proceso cognitivo unimodal de explicación de la lectura de mentes, sea de teorización o simulación. En este trabajo se discuten las implicaciones que tienen estos enfoques en la investigación filosófica y empírica, y se defiende la tesis de que la lectura de mentes no es una capacidad unimodal. Se presentan varias de las inconsistencias de la TT y la TS al buscar un acoplamiento con la evidencia empírica en psicología y neurociencia cognitiva, lo que refleja que, en efecto, la atribución de estados mentales no es el resultado de un proceso cognitivo único. Se concluye que son varios los procesos cognitivos, con distinciones de nivel y complejidad funcional encargados del reconocimiento y atribución de estados psicológicos en los demás, lo que exige un enfoque híbrido, integrativo, pluralista y coherente de la lectura de mentes.","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43233267","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PrincipiaPub Date : 2022-08-19DOI: 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e77217
Vincenzo Ciccarelli
{"title":"Grundlagen §64: an alternative strategy to account for second-order abstraction","authors":"Vincenzo Ciccarelli","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e77217","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e77217","url":null,"abstract":"A famous passage in Section 64 of Frege’s Grundlagen may be seen as a justification for the truth of abstraction principles. The justification is grounded in the procedure of content recarving which Frege describes in the passage. In this paper I argue that Frege’s procedure of content recarving while possibly correct in the case of first-order equivalence relations is insufficient to grant the truth of second-order abstractions. Moreover, I propose a possible way of justifying second-order abstractions by referring to the operation of content recarving and I show that the proposal relies to a certain extent on the Basic Law V. Therefore, if we are to justify the truth of second-order abstractions by invoking the content recarving procedure we are committed to a special status of some instances of the Basic Law V and thus to a special status of extensions of concepts as abstract objects.","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45663374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PrincipiaPub Date : 2022-08-19DOI: 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e78594
D. Fernandes
{"title":"Henkin on Nominalism and Higher-Order Logic","authors":"D. Fernandes","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e78594","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e78594","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper a proposal by Henkin of a nominalistic interpretation for second and higher-order logic is developed in detail and analysed. It was proposed as a response to Quine’s claim that second and higher-order logic not only are (α) committed to the existence of sets, but also are (β) committed to the existence of more sets than can ever be referred to in the language. Henkin’s interpretation is rarely cited in the debate on semantics and ontological commitments for these logics, though it has many interesting ideas that are worth exploring. The detailed development will show that it employs an early strategy of using substitutional quantification in order to reduce ontological commitments. It will be argued that the perspective adopted for the predicate variables renders it a natural extension of Quine’s nominalistic interpretation for first-order logic. However, we will argue that, with respect to Quine’s nominalistic program and his notion of ontological commitment, (α) still holds and thus Henkin’s interpretation is not nominalistic. Nevertheless, it will be seen that (β) is addressed successfully and this provides further insights on the so-called “Skolem Paradox”. Moreover, the interpretation is ontologically parsimonious and, in this respect, it arguably fares better than a recent proposal by Bob Hale.","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41564963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PrincipiaPub Date : 2022-08-19DOI: 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e81977
A. D. Bassford
{"title":"An Intuitive Solution to the Problem of Induction","authors":"A. D. Bassford","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e81977","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e81977","url":null,"abstract":"The subject of this essay is the classical problem of induction, which is sometimes attributed to David Hume and called “the Humean Problem of Induction.” Here, I examine a certain sort of Neo-Aristotelian solution to the problem, which appeals to the concept of natural kinds in its response to the inductive skeptic. This position is most notably represented by Howard Sankey and Marc Lange. The purpose of this paper is partly destructive and partly constructive. I raise two questions. The first is: Are the natural kind solutions to the problem successful? The first thesis of this paper is that they are not, and I will show how and why they fail. And the second question I raise here is: Is there nonetheless some alternative Neo-Aristotelian solution to the problem which is successful and can overcome the shortcomings endemic to the Sankey-Lange account? The second thesis is that there is, and I’ll attempt to sketch one. My stance here may be summarized by saying that, while I agree with Sankey and Lange that the problem of induction can be adequately resolved, and while I am on the whole sympathetic with the Aristotelian spirit of their account(s), I am, for all that, dissatisfied with the letter of them. Nothing short of a more thoroughgoing Aristotelianism about the epistemology of induction will do.\u0000 ","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46099714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PrincipiaPub Date : 2022-08-19DOI: 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e83767
Mário Ariel González Porta
{"title":"Sobre el Lugar de Frege (y Moore) en el Psicologismusstreit","authors":"Mário Ariel González Porta","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e83767","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e83767","url":null,"abstract":"La crítica al psicologismo juega un papel igualmente esencial en los orígenes de neokantianismo, fenomenología y filosofía analítica. Este trabajo se propone estudiar el desarollo de tal crítica en la filosofía analítica correlacionando el mismo a aquel que se opera en el neokantianismo y en la fenomenología. Bajo tal perspectiva, son revisadas ciertas consideraciones anacrónicas con respecto a autores tales como Frege y Moore.","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43413515","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PrincipiaPub Date : 2022-08-19DOI: 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e80667
Kevin Meeker
{"title":"Abilism Ascendant?","authors":"Kevin Meeker","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e80667","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e80667","url":null,"abstract":"John Turri has recently called for a major shift in how the vast majority of philosophers think of knowledge. Instead of maintaining that knowledge must proceed from reliable processes, he urges epistemologists to move toward an “abilist” view that allows knowledge to proceed from abilities that are not truth-conducive. More strongly, he claims to have provided conclusive reasons for abandoning the idea that knowledge requires reliability. In this paper I explain why Turri has failed to make the case for preferring abilism.","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46370091","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PrincipiaPub Date : 2022-08-19DOI: 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e83748
H. Sankey
{"title":"On Mr Truetemp's Lack of Virtue","authors":"H. Sankey","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e83748","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e83748","url":null,"abstract":"Keith Lehrer’s case of Mr Truetemp, whose reliably formed true beliefs about the temperature are the result of a tempucomp implanted in his head, is designed as a counterexample to process reliabilism. In this short note, the example is explored from the point of view of the two main forms of virtue epistemology. It is suggested that Truetemp’s reliably formed true beliefs about the temperature fail to be virtuously formed in either the sense of the virtue reliabilist or the virtue responsibilist. Hence, virtue epistemology is able to handle the case of Mr Truetemp.","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48367541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PrincipiaPub Date : 2022-08-19DOI: 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e84682
De Oliveira
{"title":"An alternative View for Scientific Models Based on Metaphors: a case analysis from Darwin's use of metaphors","authors":"De Oliveira","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e84682","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e84682","url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to offer an alternative view for understanding scientific models based on metaphors. To accomplish this, we employ a special case of Darwin’s use of metaphors, such as the notion of powerful Being, in order to represent natural selection. Our proposal contributes to issues in the literature of scientific model, such as imprecisions in the understanding of scientific models, especially in models based on metaphors. Thus, our alternative view of models based on metaphors, and inspired by Darwin’s use of metaphors, provides us with four features, a-simplification and selection; b-articulation of familiar-unfamiliar structures; c-accessibility and moderations of complexity, and finally d-local realism. We contrast these features with Darwin’s use of a metaphors. We conclude by saying that our proposal of metaphor’s approach of models does not only contribute to the clarification of how these types of scientific models can be understood but it shows that metaphors can also contain a realist element that explains why scientists often use it in their practices of modeling the world.","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47726698","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PrincipiaPub Date : 2022-06-07DOI: 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e84677
Matheus de Lima Rui
{"title":"What is the aim of models in formal epistemology?","authors":"Matheus de Lima Rui","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e84677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e84677","url":null,"abstract":"It is certainly well accepted that formal models play a key role in scientific job. Its use goes from natural sciences like physics and even to social sciences like economics and politics. Using mathematics allows the researcher to consider more complicated scenarios involving several variables. Some models are developed to make predictions, others to describe a phenomena, or just to improve the explanation of events in the world. But what has all this to do with philosophy? The aim of the present paper is to investigate debates on the role of formal models in a specific philosophical subject, precisely, the epistemology of rationality. Are we able to explain why models are needed in epistemological work? This answer will be addressed on the assumptions that epistemological theorizing is committed with normative statements. More specifically, epistemologists are concerned with normative questions about what rationality requires from epistemic agents. The first goal is to discuss some assumptions about the role of mathematical models in formal epistemology undertaking. And secondly, I will argue for the following two claims: (i) formal models are useful tools for predicting consequences of normative assumption about what is intuitively required by rationality; and (ii) insofar rationality theory is normative in virtue of being instrumentalist and aiming at truth, formal models are means-end tools, therefore, for rationality, mathematical models are devices for maximizing truth in doxastic states.\u0000 ","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47212524","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PrincipiaPub Date : 2022-06-07DOI: 10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e84576
C. Elgin
{"title":"Models as Felicitous Falsehoods","authors":"C. Elgin","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e84576","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e84576","url":null,"abstract":"I argue that models enable us to understand reality in ways that we would be unable to do if we restricted ourselves to the unvarnished truth. The point is not just that the features that a model skirts can permissibly be neglected. They ought to be neglected. Too much information occludes patterns that figure in an understanding of the phenomena. The regularities a model reveals are real and informative. But many of them show up only under idealizing assumptions.","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70469313","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}