Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T14:48:25.266Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rationality and Higher-Order Intentionality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2010

Alan Millar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

According to the rationality thesis, the possession of propositional attitudes is inextricably tied to rationality. How in this context should we conceive of rationality? In one sense, being rational is contrasted with being non-rational, as when human beings are described as rational animals. In another sense, being rational is contrasted with being irrational. I shall call rationality in this latter sense evaluative rationality. Whatever else it might involve, evaluative rationality surely has to do with satisfying requirements of rationality such as, presumably, the following:

(1) That one avoid inconsistency in beliefs.

(2) That one not adopt new beliefs unless what one knows entails or is evidence for the truth of those beliefs.

(3) That one not have φing as a goal yet do nothing necessary for one to φ. (Means/end requirement.)

Type
Papers
Information
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements , Volume 49 , March 2001 , pp. 179 - 198
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baron-Cohen, S. 1995. Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind (Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bermúdez, J. L. 1995. ‘Nonconceptual content: From Perceptual Experience to Subpersonal Computational States’, Mind and Language, 10, 333–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, N., Flanagan, O. and Güzeldere, G. (eds.) 1997. The Nature of Consciousness (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).Google Scholar
Bratman, M. 1987. Intentions, Plans, and Practical Reason (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Bratman, M. 1999. Faces of Intention; Selected Essays on Intention and Agency (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, R. 1995. The Thinking Ape (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Carruthers, P. 1996. Language, Thought, and Consciousness: An Essay in Philosophical Psychology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carruthers, P. and Smith, P. K. (eds) 1996. Theories of Theories of Mind (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. 1980(a). ‘Mental Events’, in Davidson, D. 1980(b), pp. 207–27.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. 1980(b) Essays on Actions and Events (Oxford:Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
Davidson, D. 1984(a). ‘Thought and Talk’, in Davidson, D. 1984(b), pp. 155–70.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. 1984(b) Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
Davidson, D. 1990. ‘Representation and Interpretation’, in Mohyeldin Said, K. A., Newton-Smith, W. H., Viale, R. and Wilkes, K. V. (eds) 1990, pp. 13–26.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. 1991. ‘Three Varieties of Human Knowledge’, in Phillips Griffiths, A. (ed.) 1999, pp. 153–66.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. 1981. ‘Conditions of Personhood’ in Brainstorms (Brighton, Sussex: The Harvester Press), pp. 267–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, A. 1989. ‘Interpretation Psychologised’, Mind and Language, 4, 161–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1957. ‘Meaning’ Philosophical Review, 66, 337–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1969. ‘Utterer's meaning and Intentions’, Philosophical Review, 78, 147–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kripke, S. 1979. ‘A Puzzle About Belief’, in Margalit, A. (ed.) 1979, pp. 239–83.Google Scholar
Lennon, K. 1990. Explaining Behaviour (La Salle, Illinois:Open Court).Google Scholar
Margalit, A. (ed.) 1979. Meaning and Use (Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohyeldin Said, K. A., Newton-Smith, W. H., Viale, R. and Wilkes, K. V., 1990. Modelling the Mind (Oxford: Clarendon Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettit, P. 1993. The Common Mind (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Phillips Griffiths, A. (ed.) 1991. A. J. Ayer Memorial Essays, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement: 30 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Rosenthal, D. 1997. ‘A Theory of Consciousness’, in Block, N., Flanagan, O. and Güzeldere, G. (eds) (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 729–53.Google Scholar
Smith, M. 1993. The Moral Problem (Oxford: Blackwell).Google Scholar
Stein, E. 1996. Without Good Reason (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
Tanney, J. 1999. ‘Normativity and Judgement’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume 73, 45–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiten, A. 1996. ‘When does behaviour-reading become mind-reading?’, in Carruthers, P. and Smith, P. K. (eds) 1996, pp. 277–92.Google Scholar
Winters, B. 1983. ‘Inferring’, Philosophical Studies, 44, 201–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar