This paper argues that most of the alleged straight solutions to the sceptical paradox which Kripke ascribed to Wittgenstein can be regarded as the first horn of a dilemma whose second horn is the paradox itself. The dilemma is proved to be a by‐product of a foundationalist assumption on the notion of justification, as applied to linguistic behaviour. It is maintained that the assumption is unnecessary and that the dilemma is therefore spurious. To this end, an alternative conception of the (...) justification of linguistic behaviour is outlined, a conception that vindicates some of the insights behind Kripke's Wittgenstein's sceptical solution of the paradox. This alternative conception is defended against two objections (both familiar from McDowell's works): (1) that it would imply that for the linguistic community there is no authority, no standard to meet and, therefore, no possibility of error and (2) that it would lead to a kind of idealism. (shrink)

If you’re a professional philosopher, you’ve probably heard of Brentano as the thinker who reintroduced the notion of intentionality into modern philosophy. If you’re not a professional philosopher, you’ve probably never heard of him. But Brentano’s philosophical work expands far beyond the theme of intentionality and constitutes in fact a complete philosophical system, with well worked out and strikingly original theories in every major area of philosophy. The purpose of this article is to provide a panoramic yet digestible overview of (...) Brentano’s contributions in most areas of philosophy, with greater focus on theoretical philosophy. The article is written to be understood without any background in philosophy, and in fact may double as an introduction to the various branches philosophy itself. (shrink)

Eräs 1900-luvun kielifilosofian kiinnostavimmista aloitteista oli ehdotus, joka määritteli merkitykset kommunikaation avulla, puhujien intentioiden kautta. Tämä linja kehittyi aikanaan kuuluisaksi Paul Gricen ansiosta. Osoittautuu, että hyvin samantapaisia ajatuksia oli alustavasti esittänyt jo suomalainen Erik Ahlman useissa teksteissään vuodesta 1926 alkaen. Hänen tärkein innoittajansa oli silloin Anton Martyn kieliteoria. Ahlman tekee myös olennaisen erottelun: toisaalta puhujilla on yksityiset intentionsa, toisaalta kielen yleinen normisto säätelee ”pelin sääntöjen lailla” sitä mitä lauseella voi mielekkäästi ilmaista. Ilmeisesti Ahlman on etappi Martyn ja Gricen välillä ja (...) ehkä myös ensimmäinen, joka Suomessa teki varsinaista kielifilosofiaa. (shrink)

G. F. Stout is famous as an early twentieth century proselyte for abstract particulars, or tropes as they are now often called. He advanced his version of trope theory to avoid the excesses of nominalism on the one hand and realism on the other. But his arguments for tropes have been widely misconceived as metaphysical, e.g. by Armstrong. In this paper, I argue that Stout’s fundamental arguments for tropes were ideological and epistemological rather than metaphysical. He moulded his scheme to (...) fit what is actually given to us in perception, arguing that our epistemic practices would break down in an environment where only universals were given to us. (shrink)