Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Can animals act for reasons?Hans Johann Https://Orcidorg909X Glock - 2009 - .
    This essay argues that nonlinguistic animals qualify not just for externalist notions of rationality (maximizing biological fitness or utility), but also for internal ones. They can act for reasons in several senses: their behaviour is subject to intentional explanations, they can act in the light of reasonsprovided that the latter are conceived as objective facts rather than subjective mental statesand they can deliberate. Finally, even if they could not, it would still be misguided to maintain that animals are capable only (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • Can Animals Act For Reasons?Hans-Johann Glock - 2009 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 52 (3):232-254.
    This essay argues that non-linguistic animals qualify not just for externalist notions of rationality (maximizing biological fitness or utility), but also for internal ones. They can act for reasons in several senses: their behaviour is subject to intentional explanations, they can act in the light of reasons - provided that the latter are conceived as objective facts rather than subjective mental states - and they can deliberate. Finally, even if they could not, it would still be misguided to maintain that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  • Rationality, Reasons, Rules.Brad Hooker - 2022 - In Christoph C. Pfisterer, Nicole Rathgeb & Eva Schmidt (eds.), Wittgenstein and Beyond: Essays in Honour of Hans-Johann Glock. New York: Routledge. pp. 275-290.
    H.-J. Glock has made important contributions to discussions of rationality, reasons, and rules. This chapter addresses four conceptions of rationality that Glock identifies. One of these conceptions of rationality is that rationality consists in responsiveness to reasons. This chapter goes on to consider the idea that reasons became prominent in normative ethics because of their usefulness in articulating moral pluralism. The final section of the chapter connects reasons and rules and contends that both are ineliminable.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Normative Defeaters and the Alleged Impossibility of Mere Animal Knowledge for Reflective Subjects.Giacomo Melis - 2023 - Philosophia 51 (4):2065-2083.
    One emerging issue in contemporary epistemology concerns the relation between animal knowledge, which can be had by agents unable to take a view on the epistemic status of their attitudes, and reflective knowledge, which is only available to agents capable of taking such a view. Philosophers who are open to animal knowledge often presume that while many of the beliefs of human adults are formed unreflectively and thus constitute mere animal knowledge, some of them—those which become subject of explicit scrutiny (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Practical Animal Reasoning.Martin Walter Niederl - 2021 - Undergraduate Philosophy Journal of Australasia 3:71-89.
    In his latest paper on animal agency, Glock (2019) presents a series of arguments to the extent that non-linguistic animals are capable of acting rationally and for reasons. This notwithstanding, he still denies them the ability to conceptualise reasons as reasons. I will argue that, in using Glock’s account, one can in fact claim that non- linguistic animals are capable of conceptualising reasons as reasons. For this, I will apply Glock’s own criteria for concept-possession to the concepts of a reason (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Beyond the Soul and Virtue: Benefit in Stoic Ethics.Yunlong Cao - 2021 - Undergraduate Philosophy Journal of Australasia 3:57-72.
    Readers of Stoic ethics may find ‘benefit’ (ōpheleia) an essential but enigmatic concept. It directly connects to some critical terms of Stoic ethics, such as ‘good’ and ‘virtue,’ but there is no extant discussion of a definition. Beyond the superficial connections, what makes ‘benefit’ beneficial? Why is benefit a good thing? I argue that these essential questions remain unanswerable for a good reason: Stobaeus committed to a specious claim about benefit in his Anthology, which has misguided later commentaries. Either the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Leave inference alone : Direct inferential social cognition.Patrizio Lo Presti - forthcoming - Theory and Psychology.
    Direct perception and theory-theory approaches to social cognition are opposed with respect to whether social cognition is inferential. The latter argues that it is inferential, the former that it is not. This paper argues that the opposition in terms of inference is mistaken. A sense of inference is specified on which social cognition can be inferential and directly perceptual. Arguing for inferential social cognition does not commit to a defense of indirect social cognition if inferential access to other minds can (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Keep score and punish: Brandom’s concept of responsibility.Frieder Vogelmann - 2020 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 46 (8):922-941.
    Although seldom examined and not explained by Robert Brandom himself, the concept of responsibility is as important as the concept of inference for Brandom’s account of discursivity. Whereas ‘inference’ makes explicit the propositional content of concepts as the inferentially structured totality of their relations of material incompatibility, ‘responsibility’ makes explicit the normative force of these relations. ‘Responsibility’ thus becomes the paradigm of understanding normativity’s binding force – and my critical reading demonstrates that it fosters a moralizing, juridifying and economizing understanding (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Agency, Intelligence and Reasons in Animals.Hans-Johann Https://Orcidorg909X Glock - 2019 - Philosophy 94 (4):645-671.
    What kind of activity are non-human animals capable of? A venerable tradition insists that lack of language confines them to ‘mere behaviour’. This article engages with this ‘lingualism’ by developing a positive, bottom-up case for the possibility of animal agency. Higher animals cannot just act, they can act intelligently, rationally, intentionally and for reasons. In developing this case I draw on the interplay of behaviour, cognition and conation, the unduly neglected notion of intelligence and its connection to rationality, the need (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Brandom and the Second Person.Glenda Satne - 2017 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 25 (2):189-209.
    Brandom is one of the main advocators of the idea that meaning is instituted within basic linguistic practices through mutual exchanges. The aim of this paper is to show that such framework cannot do the required job if the dynamics of mutual exchanges is understood in interpretational terms. After arguing that the interpretational framework does not work, the paper presents an alternative second-personal conversational model capable of meeting the challenge.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Belief Attribution as Indirect Communication.Christopher Gauker - 2020 - In Ladislav Koreň, Hans Bernhard Schmid, Preston Stovall & Leo Townsend (eds.), Groups, Norms and Practices: Essays on Inferentialism and Collective Intentionality. Cham: Springer. pp. 173-187.
    This paper disputes the widespread assumption that beliefs and desires may be attributed as theoretical entities in the service of the explanation and predic- tion of human behavior. The literature contains no clear account of how beliefs and desires might generate actions, and there is good reason to deny that principles of rationality generate a choice on the basis of an agent’s beliefs and desires. An alter- native conception of beliefs and desires is here introduced, according to which an attribution (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • (1 other version)Ethical consequences of autonomous AI. Challenges to empiricist and rationalist philosophy of mind.Patrizio Lo Presti - forthcoming - Humana. Mente.
    The possibility of autonomous artificially intelligent systems has awaken a well-known worry in the scientific community as well as in popular imaginary: the possibility that beings which have gained autonomous intelligence either turn against their creators or at least make the moral and ethical superiority of creators with respect to the created questionable. The present paper argues that such worries are wrong-headed. Specifically, if AAIs raise a worry about human ways of life or human value it is a worry for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Animal Minds: A Non-Representationalist Approach.Hans-Johann Glock - 2013 - American Philosophical Quarterly 50 (3):213-232.
    Do animals have minds? We have known at least since Aristotle that humans constitute one species of animal. And some benighted contemporaries apart, we also know that most humans have minds. To have any bite, therefore, the question must be restricted to non-human animals, to which I shall henceforth refer simply as "animals." I shall further assume that animals are bereft of linguistic faculties. So, do some animals have minds comparable to those of humans? As regards that question, there are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Assertion, justificatory commitment, and trust.Fernando Rudy Hiller - 2016 - Análisis Filosófico 36 (1):29-53.
    This paper discusses the commitment account of assertion, according to which two necessary conditions for asserting that p are the speaker's undertaking a commitment to justify her assertion in the face of challenges and the speaker's licensing the audience to defer justificatory challenges back to her. Relying on what I call the "cancellation test," and focusing on Robert Brandom's version of the CAA, I show that the latter is wrong: it is perfectly possible to assert that p even while explicitly (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Percepción y mentes animales.Daniel E. Kalpokas - 2018 - Revista de Filosofía 43 (2):201-221.
    En este artículo propongo una variedad de conceptualismo contra la objeción no conceptualista de acuerdo con la cual los enfoques no conceptualistas no serían capaces de explicar apropiadamente la percepción animal. En primer lugar, sintetizo la posición de McDowell sobre las mentes animales. En segundo lugar, señalo algunos problemas conceptuales en ella. En tercer lugar, sugiero una extensión del conceptualismo al reino animal a fin de resolver las inconsistencias de McDowell y de acomodar cierta evidencia empírica acerca de algunas capacidades (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • 推論主義の独自性と意義.Shuhei Shimamura - 2015 - Kagaku Tetsugaku 48 (2):93-109.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark