Mind

ISSN: 0026-4423

7 found

View year:

  1. Hume’s Separability Principle, his Dictum, and their Implications.Graham Clay - 2024 - Mind 133 (530):504-516.
    Hsueh M. Qu has recently argued that Hume’s famed ‘Separability Principle’ from the Treatise entangles him in a contradiction. Qu offers a modified principle as a solution but also argues that the mature Hume would not have needed to avail himself of it, given that Hume’s arguments in the first Enquiry do not depend on this principle in any form. To the contrary, I show that arguments in the first Enquiry depend on this principle, but I agree with Qu that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Does Non-Measurability Favour Imprecision?Cian Dorr - 2024 - Mind 133 (530):472-503.
    In a recent paper, Yoaav Isaacs, Alan Hájek, and John Hawthorne argue for the rational permissibility of "credal imprecision" by appealing to certain propositions associated with non-measurable spatial regions: for example, the proposition that the pointer of a spinner will come to rest within a certain non-measurable set of points on its circumference. This paper rebuts their argument by showing that its premises lead to implausible consequences in cases where one is trying to learn, by making multiple observations, whether a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Scope of Consent, by Tom Dougherty. [REVIEW]Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa - 2024 - Mind 133 (530):588-597.
    Consent, on a standard theoretical framework, is a way of giving permission or waiving a right. Dougherty’s book is about the ‘scope’ of consent: which acts are permitted by a given act of consent? Along the way, Dougherty offers a view about what consent consists in and why it does its morally transformative work. The book is an exemplar of careful analytic philosophy. Philosophers working on consent in that tradition will find it essential reading. Following are more specific reactions that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Conceptual Engineering: For What Matters.Sebastian Köhler & Herman Veluwenkamp - 2024 - Mind 133 (530):400-427.
    Conceptual engineering is the enterprise of evaluating and improving our representational devices. But how should we conduct this enterprise? One increasingly popular answer to this question proposes that conceptual engineering should proceed in terms of the functions of our representational devices. In this paper, we argue that the best way of understanding this suggestion is in terms of normative functions, where normative functions of concepts are, roughly, things that they allow us to do that matter normatively (for example, things in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5. Why Care About What There Is?Daniel Z. Korman - 2024 - Mind 133 (530):428-451.
    There’s the question of what there is, and then there’s the question of what ultimately exists. Many contend that, once we have this distinction clearly in mind, we can see that there is no sensible debate to be had about whether there are such things as properties or tables or numbers, and that the only ontological question worth debating is whether such things are ultimate (in one or another sense). I argue that this is a mistake. Taking debates about ordinary (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  6. Review of Rebecca Stangl, Neither Heroes Nor Saints: Ordinary Virtue, Extraordinary Virtue, and Self-Cultivation[REVIEW]Jeremy Reid - 2024 - Mind 133 (529):258-267.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Kant's Fantasy.Francey Russell - 2024 - Mind.
    Throughout his lectures and published writings on anthropology, Kant describes a form of unintentional, unstructured, obscure, and pleasurable imaginative mental activity, which he calls fantasy (Phantasie), where we ‘take pleasure in letting our mind wander about in obscurity.’ In the context of his pragmatic anthropology, Kant was concerned not only to describe this form of mental activity as a fact of human psychology, but more importantly, to criticize and discourage it. But must we share Kant’s negative evaluation? Could fantasy play (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
 Previous issues
  
Next issues