To browse Academia.
Sitzung ist abgelaufen
See Paul Ricoeur, Husserl Evanston: Northwestern University Press, , for a definition of this position, which is never clearly stated by Husserl. How Not to Solve Ethical Problems
Putnam, The Many Faces of Realism, See Putnam, The Many Faces of Realism, 12, 15, 17 and Realism with a Human Face, 52, See Gail Soffer, “Phenomenology and Scientific Realism: Husserl’s Critique of Galileo,” Review of Metaphysics 44(1) () See Putnam, The Many Faces of Realism,
Sep 15, 2020 · Bernard Williams, a prominent example of one whom Putnam regards as a paradigmatic Metaphysical Realist, in a review article of Putnam’s Realism with a Human Face, is happy to grant that Metaphysical Realism is an “illusion.” 4 And Williams goes on to admit serious doubts that there is any such doctrine on the ground that no doctrine has ...
Realism with a Human Face — Hilary Putnam, James Conant ...
01/03/1992 · One of America's great philosophers says the time has come to reform philosophy. Putnam calls upon philosophers to attend to the gap between the present condition of their subject and the human aspirations that philosophy should and once did claim to represent. …
Realism with a Human Face by Hilary Putnam () | | ISBN: | Kostenloser Versand für alle Bücher mit Versand und Verkauf duch Amazon.
Just as "state one" simply is the state in which, given a particular input, such-and-such happens, so being in pain is the state which disposes one to cry "ouch", become distracted, wonder what the cause is, and so forth. In the late s, Putnam abandoned his adherence to functionalism and other computational theories of mind.
His change of mind was primarily due to the difficulties computational theories have in explaining certain intuitions with respect to the externalism of mental content. This is illustrated by Putnam's own Twin Earth thought experiment see Philosophy of language.
Asserting that functionalism is really a watered-down identity theory in which mental kinds are identified with functional kinds, Putnam argued that mental kinds may be multiply realizable over functional kinds. The argument for functionalism is that the same mental state could be implemented by the different states of a universal Turing machine.
Despite Putnam's rejection of functionalism, it has continued to flourish and been developed into numerous versions by Fodor, David Marr , Daniel Dennett , and David Lewis , among others. By Putnam accepted a modification of functionalism called "liberal functionalism". The view holds that "what matters for consciousness and for mental properties generally is the right sort of functional capacities and not the particular matter that subserves those capacities".
One of Putnam's contributions to philosophy of language is his claim that "meaning just ain't in the head". His views on meaning, first laid out in Meaning and Reference , then in The Meaning of "Meaning" , use his "Twin Earth" thought experiment to illustrate that terms' meanings are determined by factors outside the mind. Twin Earth shows this, according to Putnam, since on Twin Earth everything is identical to Earth, except that its lakes, rivers and oceans are filled with XYZ rather than H 2 O.
Consequently, when an earthling, Fredrick, uses the Earth-English word "water", it has a different meaning from the Twin Earth-English word "water" when used by his physically identical twin, Frodrick, on Twin Earth. Since Fredrick and Frodrick are physically indistinguishable when they utter their respective words, and since their words have different meanings, meaning cannot be determined solely by what is in their heads. Since Descartes's time, philosophers had been concerned with proving knowledge from the basis of subjective experience.
Thanks to Putnam, Saul Kripke , Tyler Burge and others, Davidson said, philosophy could now take the objective realm for granted and start questioning the alleged "truths" of subjective experience. Along with Kripke, Keith Donnellan , and others, Putnam contributed to what is known as the causal theory of reference.
There is a linguistic division of labor, analogous to Adam Smith 's economic division of labor, according to which such terms have their references fixed by the "experts" in the particular field of science to which the terms belong. So, for example, the reference of the term "lion" is fixed by the community of zoologists, the reference of the term "elm tree" is fixed by the community of botanists, and chemists fix the reference of the term "table salt" as sodium chloride.
These referents are considered rigid designators in the Kripkean sense and are disseminated outward to the linguistic community. Putnam specifies a finite sequence of elements a vector for the description of the meaning of every term in the language. Such a vector consists of four components:. Such a "meaning-vector" provides a description of the reference and use of an expression within a particular linguistic community. It provides the conditions for its correct usage and makes it possible to judge whether a single speaker attributes the appropriate meaning to it or whether its use has changed enough to cause a difference in its meaning.
According to Putnam, it is legitimate to speak of a change in the meaning of an expression only if the reference of the term, and not its stereotype, has changed. Putnam made a significant contribution to philosophy of mathematics in the Quine—Putnam indispensability argument for mathematical realism. Both Putnam and Quine invoke naturalism to justify the exclusion of all non-scientific entities, and hence to defend the "only" part of "all and only".
The assertion that "all" entities postulated in scientific theories, including numbers, should be accepted as real is justified by confirmation holism. This puts the nominalist who wishes to exclude the existence of sets and non-Euclidean geometry but include the existence of quarks and other undetectable entities of physics, for example, in a difficult position.
Putnam holds the view that mathematics, like physics and other empirical sciences, uses both strict logical proofs and " quasi-empirical " methods. Putnam has contributed to scientific fields not directly related to his work in philosophy. In computability theory , Putnam investigated the structure of the ramified analytical hierarchy , its connection with the constructible hierarchy and its Turing degrees.
In computer science , Putnam is known for the Davis—Putnam algorithm for the Boolean satisfiability problem SAT , developed with Martin Davis in In , they further refined the algorithm with the help of George Logemann and Donald W. It became known as the DPLL algorithm.
In epistemology , Putnam is known for his "brain in a vat" thought experiment a modernized version of Descartes 's evil demon hypothesis. The argument is that one cannot coherently suspect that one is a disembodied "brain in a vat" placed there by some " mad scientist ". This follows from the causal theory of reference. Words always refer to the kinds of things they were coined to refer to, the kinds of things their user, or the user's ancestors, experienced.
So, if some person, Mary, is a "brain in a vat", whose every experience is received through wiring and other gadgetry created by the mad scientist, then Mary's idea of a brain does not refer to a real brain, since she and her linguistic community have never encountered such a thing.
To her a brain is actually an image fed to her through the wiring. Nor does her idea of a vat refer to a real vat. So if, as a brain in a vat, she says, "I'm a brain in a vat", she is actually saying, "I'm a brain-image in a vat-image", which is incoherent. On the other hand, if she is not a brain in a vat, then saying that she is a brain in a vat is still incoherent, because she actually means the opposite.
This is a form of epistemological externalism : knowledge or justification depends on factors outside the mind and is not solely determined internally. Putnam has clarified that his real target in this argument was never skepticism, but metaphysical realism.
By arguing that such a scenario is impossible, Putnam attempts to show that this notion of a gap between one's concept of the world and the way it is is absurd. One cannot have a "God's-eye" view of reality. One is limited to one's conceptual schemes, and metaphysical realism is therefore false.
He adopted a rather different view, which he called " internal realism "   or " pragmatic realism ". Internal realism is the view that, although the world may be causally independent of the human mind, the world's structure—its division into kinds, individuals and categories—is a function of the human mind, and hence the world is not ontologically independent.
The general idea is influenced by Immanuel Kant 's idea of the dependence of our knowledge of the world on the categories of thought. The problem with metaphysical realism, according to Putnam, is that it fails to explain the possibility of reference and truth. But how is it possible that the world "carves up" into certain structures and categories, the mind carves up the world into its own categories and structures, and the two carvings perfectly coincide?
The answer must be that the world does not come pre-structured but that the human mind and its conceptual schemes impose structure on it. In Reason, Truth, and History , Putnam identified truth with what he termed "idealized rational acceptability. Peirce , is that a belief is true if it would be accepted by anyone under ideal epistemic conditions. Nelson Goodman formulated a similar notion in Fact, Fiction and Forecast We need to repaint that picture.
All possible worlds lie within the actual one", Goodman wrote. None of these descriptions can be scientifically proven to be the "one, true" description of the world. For Putnam, this does not imply relativism , because not all descriptions are equally correct and correctness is not determined subjectively. Putnam renounced internal realism in his reply to Simon Blackburn in the volume Reading Putnam.
Although he abandoned internal realism, Putnam still resisted the idea that any given thing or system of things can be described in exactly one complete and correct way.
He thus accepts "conceptual relativity"—the view that it may be a matter of choice or convention, e. Under the influence of Peirce and William James , Putnam also became convinced that there is no fact—value dichotomy; that is, normative e.
At the end of the s, Putnam became increasingly disillusioned with what he perceived as the " scientism " and the rejection of history that characterize modern analytic philosophy. He rejected internal realism because it assumed a "cognitive interface" model of the relation between the mind and the world. Putnam claimed that the very notion of truth would have to be abandoned by a consistent eliminative materialist. Many of Putnam's last works addressed the concerns of ordinary people, particularly social problems.
He also discussed Jürgen Habermas 's ideas, and wrote articles influenced by continental philosophy. But many significant criticisms of his views have come from other philosophers and scientists. It is the similarity or homology of brain structures that allows us to generalize across species. Putnam himself formulated one of the main arguments against functionalism: the Twin Earth thought experiment.
But there have been other criticisms. John Searle 's Chinese room argument is a direct attack on the claim that thought can be represented as a set of functions.
The thought experiment is designed to show that it is possible to mimic intelligent action with a purely functional system, without any interpretation or understanding. Searle describes a situation in which a person who speaks only English is locked in a room with Chinese symbols in baskets and a rule book in English for moving the symbols around. The person is instructed, by people outside the room, to follow the rule book for sending certain symbols out of the room when given certain symbols.
The people outside the room speak Chinese and are communicating with the person inside via the Chinese symbols. According to Searle, it would be absurd to claim that the English speaker inside "knows" Chinese based on these syntactic processes alone. This argument attempts to show that systems that operate merely on syntactic processes cannot realize any semantics meaning or intentionality aboutness.
Searle thus attacks the idea that thought can be equated with following a set of syntactic rules and concludes that functionalism is an inadequate theory of the mind. Despite the many changes in his other positions, Putnam consistently adhered to semantic holism. Michael Dummett , Jerry Fodor , Ernest Lepore , and others have identified problems with this position. In the first place, they suggest that, if semantic holism is true, it is impossible to understand how a speaker of a language can learn the meaning of an expression in the language.
Given the limits of our cognitive abilities, we will never be able to master the whole of the English or any other language, even based on the false assumption that languages are static and immutable entities. Thus, if one must understand all of a natural language to understand a single word or expression, language learning is simply impossible.
Semantic holism also fails to explain how two speakers can mean the same thing when using the same expression, and therefore how any communication is possible between them.
Given a sentence P , since Fred and Mary have each mastered different parts of the English language and P is related in different ways to the sentences in each part, P means one thing to Fred and something else to Mary.
As this is a common phenomenon, the result is that P has two different meanings in two different moments in the life of the same person. Consequently, if I accept the truth of a sentence and then reject it later on, the meaning of what I rejected and what I accepted are completely different and therefore I cannot change my opinions with regard to the same sentences. Putnam's brain in a vat argument has also been criticized.
The possibility that one is a recently disembodied brain in a vat is not undermined by semantic externalism. If a person has lived her entire life outside the vat—speaking the English language and interacting normally with the outside world—prior to her "envatment" by a mad scientist, when she wakes up inside the vat, her words and thoughts e.
In that case, one's words and thoughts would not refer to anything: semantics would no longer exist and the argument would be meaningless. In philosophy of mathematics, Stephen Yablo has argued that the Quine—Putnam indispensability thesis does not demonstrate that mathematical entities are truly indispensable.
For example, one can take the argument for indispensability described above and adjust it as follows:. Finally, Curtis Brown has criticized Putnam's internal realism as a disguised form of subjective idealism , in which case it is subject to the traditional arguments against that position.
In particular, it falls into the trap of solipsism. That is, if existence depends on experience, as subjective idealism maintains, and if one's consciousness ceased to exist, then the rest of the universe would also cease to exist. Vincent C. Müller compiled a detailed bibliography of Putnam's writings, citing 16 books and articles, published in in PhilPapers.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Redirected from Hillary Putnam. American mathematician and philosopher — Chicago , Illinois , U. Arlington , Massachusetts , U. Jerry Fodor , Ned Block , Tyler Burge , David Marr , Norman Daniels , Daniel Dennett , David Lewis , Saul Kripke , Donald Davidson , George Boolos , Richard Boyd , Hartry Field , Martha Nussbaum , Paul Benacerraf , John Worrall .
Biography portal Philosophy portal. Realism with a Human Face. Edited by James F. Harvard University Press. The American Philosopher , , p. Worrall, "Structural Realism: the Best of Both Worlds" in D. Papineau ed. The emphasis is Rorty's. The emphasis is Putnam's. The Southern Journal of Philosophy — Wiley. Continue with Facebook. Sign up with Google.
Log in with Microsoft. Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library. Sign Up Log In. Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote.
Is the Causal Structure of the Physical Itself Something Physical? Truth and Convention 7. Why Is a Philosopher? The Place of Facts in a World of Values
Realism with a Human Face : Hilary Putnam : 9780674749450
Mar 31, 1992 · Realism with a Human Face. 4.02 (45 ratings by Goodreads) Paperback. English. By (author) Hilary Putnam , Edited by James Conant. Share. The time has come to reform philosophy, says Hilary Putnam, one of America's great philosophers. He calls upon philosophers to attend to the gap between the present condition of their subject and the human ...
Sep 15, · Bernard Williams, a prominent example of one whom Putnam regards as a paradigmatic Metaphysical Realist, in a review of Putnam’s Realism with a Human Face, is happy to grant that Metaphysical Realism is an “illusion.” 4 And Williams goes on to admit serious doubts that there is any such doctrine on the ground that no doctrine has. Jun 01, · The emphasis is Putnam's. 13 Rorty, “Putnam and the Relativist Menace,” 14 Richard Rorty, Consequences of Pragmatism (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, ), xxxvii. The emphasis is Rorty's. 15 Putnam, Realism with a Human Face, 16 Putnam, Realism with a Human Face, 23– Jetzt online bestellen! Heimlieferung oder in Filiale: Realism with a Human Face von Hilary Putnam | Orell Füssli: Der Buchhändler Ihres Vertrauens.
Thanks for helping us catch any problems with articles on DeepDyve. We'll do our best to fix them. Check all that apply - Please note that only the first page is available if you have not Caning Tumblr a reading option after clicking "Read Article".
The emphasis is Rorty's. The emphasis is Putnam's. The Southern Journal of Philosophy — Wiley. Continue with Facebook. Sign up with Google. Log in with Microsoft. Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library. Sign Up Log In. Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote.
Let us know here. System error. Please try again! How was the reading experience on this article? The text was blurry Page doesn't load Other:. Thank you for submitting a report!
Submitting a report will send us an email through our customer support system. Submit report Close. Publisher Wiley Copyright The University of Memphis ISSN eISSN DOI There are no references for this article. Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals. Continue with Facebook Sign up with Google Log in with Microsoft. Already have an account? Log in. APA Case, J. Rorty and Putnam: Separate and Unequal. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 33 2MLA Case, Jennifer.