维特根斯坦论倒谱

D. Stern
{"title":"维特根斯坦论倒谱","authors":"D. Stern","doi":"10.1515/9783110330571.135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on \"Inverted Qualia\" begins by noting that \"Qualia inversion thought experiments are ubiquitous in contemporary philosophy of mind (largely due to the influence of Shoemaker 1982 and Block 1990). The most popular kind is one or another variant of Locke's hypothetical case of “spectrum inversion”, in which strawberries and ripe tomatoes produce visual experiences of the sort that are actually produced by grass and cucumbers, grass and cucumbers produce experiences of the sort that are actually produced by strawberries and ripe tomatoes, and so on.\" This paper reviews and evaluates what Wittgenstein had to say on the topic. In the Philosophical Investigations , Wittgenstein observes that the idea of private experience, \"that nobody knows whether other people also have this or something else\" (sec 272) supports the assumption that it is possible, but unverifiable, that \"one part of mankind had one sensation of red, and one part another\", and thus the possibility of spectrum inversion. However, he does not explicitly discuss such hypotheses. Recently, Block (2007) has drawn attention to Wittgenstein's discussion of spectrum inversion in the \"Notes for Lectures on 'Sense Data.'\" There, Wittgenstein discusses \"cases in which we should say that the person sees green what I see red\" (Wittgenstein 1993, 285), conceding that a single person case of spectrum inversion is conceivable, but denying that this could always be the case. Block argues that a slippery slope leads from the concession of the possibility of spectrum inversion in a particular case to a scenario in which many people experience long-term spectrum inversion, and that such scenarios are verifiable hypotheses. I evaluate Block's critique of Wittgenstein, and Canfield's (2009) response to Block's reading.","PeriodicalId":317292,"journal":{"name":"From ontos verlag: Publications of the Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society - New Series","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wittgenstein on the Inverted Spectrum\",\"authors\":\"D. Stern\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/9783110330571.135\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on \\\"Inverted Qualia\\\" begins by noting that \\\"Qualia inversion thought experiments are ubiquitous in contemporary philosophy of mind (largely due to the influence of Shoemaker 1982 and Block 1990). The most popular kind is one or another variant of Locke's hypothetical case of “spectrum inversion”, in which strawberries and ripe tomatoes produce visual experiences of the sort that are actually produced by grass and cucumbers, grass and cucumbers produce experiences of the sort that are actually produced by strawberries and ripe tomatoes, and so on.\\\" This paper reviews and evaluates what Wittgenstein had to say on the topic. In the Philosophical Investigations , Wittgenstein observes that the idea of private experience, \\\"that nobody knows whether other people also have this or something else\\\" (sec 272) supports the assumption that it is possible, but unverifiable, that \\\"one part of mankind had one sensation of red, and one part another\\\", and thus the possibility of spectrum inversion. However, he does not explicitly discuss such hypotheses. Recently, Block (2007) has drawn attention to Wittgenstein's discussion of spectrum inversion in the \\\"Notes for Lectures on 'Sense Data.'\\\" There, Wittgenstein discusses \\\"cases in which we should say that the person sees green what I see red\\\" (Wittgenstein 1993, 285), conceding that a single person case of spectrum inversion is conceivable, but denying that this could always be the case. Block argues that a slippery slope leads from the concession of the possibility of spectrum inversion in a particular case to a scenario in which many people experience long-term spectrum inversion, and that such scenarios are verifiable hypotheses. I evaluate Block's critique of Wittgenstein, and Canfield's (2009) response to Block's reading.\",\"PeriodicalId\":317292,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"From ontos verlag: Publications of the Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society - New Series\",\"volume\":\"66 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"From ontos verlag: Publications of the Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society - New Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110330571.135\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"From ontos verlag: Publications of the Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society - New Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110330571.135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《斯坦福哲学百科全书》关于“颠倒感质”的词条一开始就指出,“感质倒置的思想实验在当代心灵哲学中无处不在(主要是由于苏梅克1982年和布洛克1990年的影响)。”最流行的一种是洛克假设的"光谱反转"案例的一种或另一种变体,其中草莓和成熟的西红柿产生的视觉体验实际上是由草和黄瓜产生的,草和黄瓜产生的体验实际上是由草莓和成熟的西红柿产生的,等等本文回顾并评价了维特根斯坦在这一主题上的观点。在《哲学研究》中,维特根斯坦观察到,私人经验的概念,“没有人知道其他人是否也有这个或其他东西”(第272节)支持这样一种假设,即“一部分人有一种红色感觉,另一部分人有另一种红色感觉”,这是可能的,但无法证实的,因此光谱反转的可能性。然而,他并没有明确地讨论这些假设。最近,Block(2007)提请注意维特根斯坦在“感官数据讲义”中对频谱反演的讨论。在那里,维特根斯坦讨论了“我们应该说我看到红色的人看到绿色的情况”(维特根斯坦1993,285),承认一个人的光谱反转的情况是可以想象的,但否认这种情况总是存在的。Block认为,“滑坡效应”会导致从对特定情况下频谱反转可能性的让步,到许多人经历长期频谱反转的情景,而这种情景是可验证的假设。我评价了布洛克对维特根斯坦的批判,以及坎菲尔德(2009)对布洛克阅读的回应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Wittgenstein on the Inverted Spectrum
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on "Inverted Qualia" begins by noting that "Qualia inversion thought experiments are ubiquitous in contemporary philosophy of mind (largely due to the influence of Shoemaker 1982 and Block 1990). The most popular kind is one or another variant of Locke's hypothetical case of “spectrum inversion”, in which strawberries and ripe tomatoes produce visual experiences of the sort that are actually produced by grass and cucumbers, grass and cucumbers produce experiences of the sort that are actually produced by strawberries and ripe tomatoes, and so on." This paper reviews and evaluates what Wittgenstein had to say on the topic. In the Philosophical Investigations , Wittgenstein observes that the idea of private experience, "that nobody knows whether other people also have this or something else" (sec 272) supports the assumption that it is possible, but unverifiable, that "one part of mankind had one sensation of red, and one part another", and thus the possibility of spectrum inversion. However, he does not explicitly discuss such hypotheses. Recently, Block (2007) has drawn attention to Wittgenstein's discussion of spectrum inversion in the "Notes for Lectures on 'Sense Data.'" There, Wittgenstein discusses "cases in which we should say that the person sees green what I see red" (Wittgenstein 1993, 285), conceding that a single person case of spectrum inversion is conceivable, but denying that this could always be the case. Block argues that a slippery slope leads from the concession of the possibility of spectrum inversion in a particular case to a scenario in which many people experience long-term spectrum inversion, and that such scenarios are verifiable hypotheses. I evaluate Block's critique of Wittgenstein, and Canfield's (2009) response to Block's reading.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信