Specifically, it contrasts with the prevailing representationalism, predicated on the idea that what grounds our ability to develop language is our ability to produce and manipulate inner representations of the world. Here Brandom's view diverges significantly from mainstream philosophy of language in seeing language not as a matter of individual cognition, but rather as a kind of social institution. Such rules determine which linguistic items it is correct or appropriate to publicly display (assert) in the context of previous performances of the same kind and/or in response to environing stimuli, as well as which non-verbal actions are appropriate as responses to such performances Brandom's main contribution is his development of Sellars' idea that the rules governing our linguistic practices – and specifically those that constitute meanings – must include broadly conceived inferential norms. And Brandom’s philosophical mentor Wilfred Sellars also emphasized the essential role of rules for our linguistic activities. There is the "rule-following discussion" concentrating on the views of Wittgenstein (for whom rules do play an important role in our "language games"). What is distinctive about Brandom is the peculiar normative twist he adds to the use-theory: meaning is not just a pattern of employment, meaning worth the name is the role of the expression conferred on it by the rules which govern it.īrandom’s normative use theory was a development from two precedents. But of course, this view of meaning has also suited other philosophical approaches, such as the pragmatists' and the later neopragmatists' – like Quine or Rorty – as well as, in some aspects, exponents of the school of ordinary language philosophy. The first of these ingredients is nowadays called the use-theory of meaning and it is often associated with the inventor of the term "language game", the later Wittgenstein. Two main ingredients that shape Brandom's inferentialism are the convictions, that firstly, meaning is the role of the expression within our "language games" and, secondly, that these "language games" are essentially rule-governed. The methods of philosophical analysis and modeling to be used to this end will be both inspired and disciplined by the current theoretical frameworks, models and hypotheses of various evolutionary sciences, psychology (developmental, cognitive, experimental) or anthropology In this way, we aim to break new philosophical ground. More specifically, we aim to naturalize inferentialism by reconstructing, rethinking and quite possibly revising its account of the nature of rules, reasoning, and meaning from the two main perspectives on man as a natural being: namely phylogenesis and ontogenesis. The theoretical innovations of inferentialism might in turn fertilize current scientific research. It is based on the idea that inferentialism can be mined as a rich resource of ideas that can be reconstructed in direction to a philosophical naturalism, according to which philosophy should be continuous with science. We find this a missed opportunity and our intended project of naturalizing inferentialism proposes to bridge this yawning gap. We are concerned that inferentialism is usually conceived of as a purely philosophical doctrine that provides a new perspective on uniquely human rational and expressive capacities, but which does not intersect with what science tells us about us as creatures with a natural, cultural and developmental history. Thus it has grown into one of the most discussed philosophical doctrines of the twenty-first century to date. Since then, it has been adopted and developed by a large number of authors and also has attracted various criticisms, while Brandom himself has provided further elaborations. The philosophical foundations of inferentialism were presented in Robert Brandom's book Making It Explicit (1994), where he developed a new theory of linguistic meaning in terms of rule-governed social practices. Inferentialism naturalized: norms, meanings and reasons in the
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |