Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

The Non-circularity Constraint: Peacocke vs. Peacocke*

By  and Dan López De Sa and Dan López De Sa


para poseerlo. De ahí que las condiciones de posesión deban ser especificables de un modo que respeten un requisito de no-circularidad. En un artículo más reciente “Implicit Conceptions, Understanding and Rationality”, (1998a) Peacocke argumenta en contra de su anterior teoría, a la luz del fenómeno que consiste en aceptar racionalmente principios que no se siguen de cosas que el pensador aceptaba previamente. En este artículo defiendo la teoría del libro, manteniendo que el requisito de no-circularidad debe ser respetado, y que las ideas más recientes de Peacocke se pueden acomodar en el marco de su anterior teoría acerca de los conceptos. According to the view that Peacocke elaborates in A Study of Concepts (1992), a concept can be individuated by providing the conditions a thinker must satisfy in order to possess that concept. Hence possessions conditions for concepts should be specifiable in a way that respects a non-circularity constraint. In a more recent paper “Implicit Conceptions, Understanding and Rationality ” (1998a) Peacocke argues against his former view, in the light of the phenomenon of rationally accepting principles which do not follow from what the thinker antecedently accepts. In this paper I defend the view of the book from his more recent criticisms, claiming that the noncircularity constraint should be respected, and that Peacocke's more recent insights could be accommodated in the framework of his former theory of concepts. One of the main tenets of A Study of Concepts (1992) was what Christopher Peacocke labeled “Principle of Dependence:” There can be nothing more to the nature of a concept than is determined by a correct account of the capacity of a thinker who has mastered the concept to have propositional attitudes to contents containing that concept (a correct account of “grasping the concept”) [Peacocke (1992), p. 5], acceptance of whic

Topics: and Rationality ’ [Peacoke
Year: 2011
OAI identifier: oai:CiteSeerX.psu:
Provided by: CiteSeerX
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • (external link)
  • (external link)
  • Suggested articles

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