Why Tracking Theories Should Allow for Clean Cases of Reliable Misrepresentation

Abstract

Reliable misrepresentation is getting things wrong in the same way all the time. In Mendelovici 2013, I argue that tracking theories of mental representation cannot allow for certain kinds of reliable misrepresentation, and that this is a problem for those views. Artiga 2013 defends teleosemantics from this argument. He agrees with Mendelovici 2013 that teleosemantics cannot account for clean cases of reliable misrepresentation, but argues that this is not a problem for the view. This paper clarifies and improves the argument in Mendelovici 2013 and responds to Artiga’s arguments. Tracking theories, teleosemantics included, really do need to allow for clean cases of reliable misrepresentation.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Artiga, Marc. 2013. Reliable misrepresentation and teleosemantics. Disputatio V(37): 265-281.

  • Bourget, David and Mendelovici, Angela. 2014. Tracking representationalism. In Philosophy of Mind: The Key Thinkers, ed. by Andrew Bailey. London: Continuum: 209-235.

  • Burge, Tyler. 1988. Individualism and self-knowledge. The Journal of Philosophy 85: 649-663.

  • Fodor, Jerry. A. 1975. The Language of Thought. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  • Fodor, Jerry. A. 1987. Psychosemantics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  • Kriegel, Uriah. 2011. The Sources of Intentionality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Martínez, Manolo. 2013. Teleosemantics and productivity. Philosophical Psychology 26(1): 47-68.

  • Mendelovici, Angela. 2010. Mental Representation and Closely Conflated Topics. PhD thesis, Princeton University.

  • Mendelovici, Angela. 2013a. Intentionalism about moods. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 2(1): 126-136.

  • Mendelovici, Angela. 2013b. Reliable misrepresentation and tracking theories of mental representation. Philosophical Studies 165(2): 421-443.

  • Mendelovici, Angela. 2014. Pure intentionalism about moods and emotions. In Current Controversies in Philosophy of Mind, ed. by Uriah Kriegel, New York: Routledge: 135-157.

  • Mendelovici, Angela. (Forthcoming). Propositionalism without propositions, objectualism without objects, properties, and kinds. In Non-Propositional Intentionality, ed. by Alex Grzankowski and Michelle Montague, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Mendelovici, Angela. (MS). Phenomenal intentionality: How to get intentionality from phenomenal consciousness.

  • Mendelovici, Angela, and Bourget, David. 2014. Naturalizing intentionality: tracking theories versus phenomenal intentionality theories. Philosophy Compass 9(5): 325-337.

  • Millikan, Ruth. G. 1984. Language, Thought and Other Biological Categories. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  • Millikan, Ruth. G. 1989. Biosemantics. Journal of Philosophy 86: 281-297.

  • Millikan, Ruth. G. 2000. On Clear and Confused Ideas: An Essay About Substance Concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Papineau, David. 1987. Reality and Representation. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

  • Pietroski, Paul. M. 1992. Intentionality and teleological error. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 73: 267-282.

  • Prinz, Jesse. 2002. Furnishing the Mind. Cambridge: MIT Bradford.

  • Rupert, Robert. D. 1999. Mental representations and Millikan’s theory of intentional content: does biology chase causality? Southern Journal of Philosophy 37 (1):113-140.

  • Shea, Nicholas. 2002. Getting clear about equivocal concepts. Disputatio 13: 34-47.

  • Shea, Nicholas. 2004. On Millikan. Belmont: Wadsworth.

  • Sterelny, Kim. 1989. Fodor’s nativism. Philosophical Studies 55(February): 119-41.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search