Norms of intentionality: norms that don’t guide

Philosophical Studies 157 (1):1-25 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

More than ever, it is in vogue to argue that no norms either play a role in or directly follow from the theory of mental content. In this paper, I present an intuitive theory of intentionality (including a theory of mental content) on which norms are constitutive of the intentional properties of attitude and content in order to show that this trend is misguided. Although this theory of intentionality—the teleological theory of intentional representation—does involve a commitment to representational norms, these norms are not problematic in the way critics have suggested they would be. In particular, these norms do not guide thinking by motivating intentional agents to (intentionally) accord with them; as a result, no obvious vicious regress threatens the theory. In the final section of this paper, I argue that accepting this teleological theory of intentionality need not commit one to thinking that intentionality is the product of natural selection

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-10-25

Downloads
1,404 (#11,903)

6 months
170 (#22,435)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Benjamin W. Jarvis
Brown University (PhD)

Citations of this work

Objects and Attitudes.Friederike Moltmann - 2024 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Doxastic Correctness.Pascal Engel - 2013 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 87 (1):199-216.

View all 18 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Studies in the way of words.Herbert Paul Grice - 1989 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
The meaning of 'meaning'.Hilary Putnam - 1975 - Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7:131-193.

View all 70 references / Add more references