Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Teleosemantics and Productivity

By Manolo Martínez


There has been much discussion of so-called teleosemantic approaches to the naturalisation of content. Such discussion, though, has been largely confined to simple, innate mental states with contents such as There is a fly here. Even assuming we can solve the issues that crop up at this stage, an account of the content of human mental states will not get too far without an account of productivity: the ability to entertain indefinitely many thoughts. \ud The best-known teleosemantic theory, Millikan’s biosemantics, offers an account of productivity in thought. This paper raises a basic worry about this account: that the use of mapping functions in the theory is unacceptable from a naturalistic point of view

Topics: Philosophy of Language, Philosophy of Mind
Year: 2011
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (1992). A Study of Concepts. doi
  2. (1990). A Theory of Content and Other Essays.
  3. (1998). Determinate Functions”, doi
  4. (2004). From metaphysical to substantive naturalism: A case study”,
  5. Functions”, in Conceptual Issues
  6. (1999). Mental Representations and Millikan's Theory of Intentional Content: doi
  7. (1994). Naturalism and dualism in the study of language and mind”,
  8. (2004). SINBAD Neurosemantics: A Theory of Mental Representation”, doi
  9. (1970). Teleological Explanations in Evolutionary Biology”,
  10. (1997). Teleological Semantics”, doi
  11. (1989). The Rule-Following Considerations”,
  12. (1982). The Varieties of Reference
  13. (1992). Troubles for new wave moral semantics: The 'open question argument' revived”,
  14. (1993). What Do Frogs Really Believe?”,

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.