Critical Race Science and Critical Race Philosophy of Science

Over several decades, feminist philosophy of science has revealed the ways in which much of science has proceeded from “mainstream” assumptions that privilege men and other hierarchically superordinate groups and existing socially constructed conceptions of gender. In doing so, it has produced a research program that, while rooted in the post- Kuhnian philosophy and sociology of science that has been taken up by many students of scientific method more generally, has been used to critique great swathes of modern science and to reveal both the biases of the mainstream, and the transformative potential of a science that proceeds from the epistemic standpoints of women as well as men and from the research questions and concerns that arise from the goal of promoting equality between men and women

The interpretation of artifacts : a critique of Dennett's design stance

The Interpretation of Artifacts; A Critique of Dennett’s Design Stance Technological artifacts are a pervasive part of human life. They are, however, largely ignored in the analytic philosophical tradition, especially by philosophical naturalists. Being mind-dependent phenomena, tied up with human intentionality, analytic philosophers have largely found the topic unscientific, not objective, or simply trivial. An important exception is Daniel Dennett, who puts design at the heart of his naturalistic theory of mind

Deconstructing Ethics: The Search for New Origins

Derrida’s theory of différance deconstructs essentialist and transcendental truths. Derrida—and others—often position this theory as a tool for achieving some ethical objective. This usage of deconstructive theory implies that the project of the ethical cannot be deconstructed. More precisely, it raises the question of if ethics can be derived without either essentialist or transcendental truths. If it cannot, then an ethical usage of deconstructive theory is self-defeating. This thesis will first show that Derridean theory deconstructs the grounds for ethics without providing another viable source for moral conclusions. Given this seemingly pre-ethical state, it will then present the Lacanian Real as a possible source for deriving moral conclusions. Ultimately, the thesis concludes that the ethical project in critical studies must find new origins; the paper gestures towards those origins

Trajectories in the Development of Islamic Theological Thought: the Synthesis of Kalam

The field of Islamic theology (kalam) is not merely a receptacle for the presentation of the creedal statements and doctrinal catechisms of Islam; it derives its raison d’être not only from the articulation and elucidation of the doctrines of faith, but also by means of its rational and painstaking explication of dogma. While many of the dogmatic statements expressed in Islamic theology naturally emanate from a traditional substratum, countless more are the result of dialectical discussions as theologians expounded upon abstract constructs of religious dogma. Recent academic research is exploring the history, trends, and conceptual achievements behind the Islamic experiment with theology, providing insights into the tradition’s ability to integrate, refine, and expand theological constructs. Scholars are also concerned with issues such as origins, authenticity, and ascription, although such matters are not deflecting attention from the rich stock of resources and materials kalam has to offer

Seeing things as people: anthropomorphism and common-sense psychology

This thesis is about common-sense psychology and its role in cognitive science. Put simply, the argument is that common-sense psychology is important because it offers clues to some complex problems in cognitive science, and because common-sense psychology has significant effects on our intuitions, both in science and on an everyday level. The thesis develops a theory of anthropomorphism in common-sense psychology. Anthropomorphism, the natural human tendency to ascribe human characteristics (and especially human mental characteristics) to things that aren't human, is an important theme in the thesis. Anthropomorphism reveals an endemic anthropocentricity that deeply influences our thinking about other minds. The thesis then constructs a descriptive model of anthropomorphism in common-sense psychology, and uses it to analyse two studies of the ascription of mental states. The first, Baron- Cohen et al. 's (1985) false belief test, shows how cognitive modelling can be used to compare different theories of common-sense psychology. The second study, Searle's (1980) `Chinese Room', shows 'that this same model can reproduce the patterns of scientific intuitions taken to systems which pass the Turing test (Turing, 1950), suggesting that it is best seen as a common-sense test for a mind, not a scientific one. Finally, the thesis argues that scientific theories involving the ascription of mentality through a model or a metaphor are partly dependent on each individual scientist's common-sense psychology. To conclude, this thesis develops an interdisciplinary study of common-sense psychology and shows that its effects are more wide ranging than is commonly thought. This means that it affects science more than might be expected, but that careful study can help us to become mindful of these effects. Within this new framework, a proper understanding of common-sense psychology could lay important new foundations for the future of cognitive science

Mental health without mirrors. A non-descriptivist approach to mental health and the intervention with people with delusions

Tesis Doctoral inédita leída en la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Facultad de Psicología. Departamento de Psicología Biológica y de la Salud. Fecha de Lectura: 16-09-202

Moderate Idealization and Information Acquisition Responsibilities

I argue that advocates of moderate epistemic idealization need some standards against which they can determine whether a particular individual P has a responsibility to acquire some specific piece of information α. Such a specification is necessary for the purpose of determining whether a reason R, the recognition of which depends on accounting for α, can legitimately be ascribed to P. To this end, I propose an initial sketch of a criterion that may be helpful in illuminating the conditions in which P might be said to have a responsibility to take α into account when searching for reasons to act or believe. I worry that reason ascriptions that are based on information acquisition expectations which are not captured by this criterion may be open to charges of authoritarianism, especially when such a reason ascription prompts one person to demand that another act in a way that is responsive to the ascribed reason

Interpreting enthymematic arguments using belief revision

This paper is about the situation in which an author (writer or speaker) presents a deductively invalid argument, but the addressee aims at a charitable interpretation and has reason to assume that the author intends to present a valid argument. How can he go about interpreting the author's reasoning as enthymematically valid? We suggest replacing the usual find-the-missing-premise approaches by an approach based on systematic efforts to ascribe a belief state to the author against the background of which the argument has to be evaluated. The suggested procedure includes rules for recording whether the author in fact accepts or denies the premises and the conclusion, as well as tests for enthymematic validity and strategies for revising belief state ascriptions. Different degrees of interpretive charity can be exercised. This is one reason why the interpretation or reconstruction of an enthymematic argument typically does not result in a unique outcom

Uskumuste ja soovide kommunikatiivne tähtsus

Kui me mõtleme, mida teised usuvad või tahavad, läheb see meile enamasti korda. Kui ma olen teadlik teise inimese mingist uskumusest, saan ma sellega nõustuda või mitte. Kui ma arvan, et teine tahab midagi, siis on mul võimalik seda soovi kas heaks kiita või halvaks panna. Selliste esmaste reaktsioonide olulisusest uskumuste ja soovide omistamise juures on senini vaimufilosoofias suuresti üle vaadatud. Tähelepanu all on ennekõike olnud hoiakute omistamise ennustav ja seletav roll. Väitekirja esmaseks eesmärgiks on täita see lünk ning avada nende mainitud reaktsioonide – nõustumise ja mittenõustumise, heakskiidu ja halvakspanu – asendamatu tähtsus sotsiaalses tunnetuses. Selle käigus näitan ühtlasi, et nendest reaktsioonidest lähtuvad ka juba edasised võimalikud käigud inimestevahelises suhtluses: manipuleerimine, läbirääkimine või isegi omistatud hoiaku omaksvõtt. Teiseks väitekirja eesmärgiks on selgitada, mis uskumustest ja soovidest mõtlemise juures teeb just sellised reaktsioonid võimalikuks. Kuna nõustumine või mittenõustumine on kohased reaktsioonid nii uskumuste kui ka väidete suhtes ning heakskiit või halvakspanu nii soovide kui ka käskluste suhtes, siis argumenteerin, et uskumuste ja soovide omistamist tuleb mõista vastavalt väidete ja käskluste kaudu. Kui me mõtleme, mida keegi usub ja tahab, on ta meie vestluspartner, kuna me kohtleme tema uskumusi kui teatavat tüüpi väiteid ja soove kui käsklusi. See kehtib isegi siis, kui ta vastavat väidet või käsklust ise pole sooritanud. Ühesõnaga, neil hoiakutel on kommunikatiivne roll. Kui me seda silmas peame, on edasiseks küsimuseks, millele uskumuste ja soovide omistused tuginema peaksid, et nad oma eriomast rolli sotsiaalses elus mängida saaks. Väidan, et nad peavad arvesse võtma tõsiasju isikute käitumise ja heaolu kohta ning nendes tõsiasjades seisneb ka uskumuste ja soovide loomus.When we think about what others believe and want, we are usually affected by what we know about their attitudes. If I’m aware that another person believes something, I have an opportunity to agree or disagree with it. If I think that another person wants something, I can endorse or disapprove of her desire. The importance of such reactions to attributed beliefs and desires has thus far been overlooked in philosophy of mind where the focus has been on explanatory and predictive roles of attitude attribution. The primary goal of this thesis is to fill this lacuna and to articulate the indispensability of such reactions – agreement/disagreement and endorsement/disapproval – for social cognition. In the process of doing it I also show how these initial reactions ground certain further possible responses in intersubjective communication: manipulation, negotiation and adoption of attributed attitudes. The second aim of this thesis is to explicate what is it about belief and desire attributions that makes the responses I’ve described possible. Because one can agree or disagree both with beliefs and assertions and endorse or disapprove both desires and requests, I argue that we should understand belief attributions in terms of assertions and desire attributions in terms of requests. When we think what someone believes and wants, we treat her as a conversation partner because her attitudes call for the same responses as speech acts do, even if she hasn’t made any explicit assertion or request herself. In short, beliefs and desires have communicative significance. Given such significance, we can also see what one needs to take into consideration when attributing these attitudes to another. My answer in the thesis is that belief and desire attributions have to be grounded in facts about the behaviour and well-being of attributees and that these facts also constitute the nature of beliefs and desires