• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Lynne Rudder Baker
(1944 - 2017)

PhD: Vanderbilt UniversityLast affiliation: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    195
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  Events
    5
  •  News and Updates
    149

 More details
  • University of Massachusetts, Amherst
    Department of Philosophy
    Unknown
Vanderbilt University
Department of Philosophy
PhD, 1972
Homepage
Amherst, Massachusetts, United States of America
Areas of Specialization
Metaphysics
Philosophy of Action
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Religion
Areas of Interest
Metaphysics
  • All publications (195)
  •  347
    Amie Thomasson on ordinary objects
    Amie Thomasson has won well-deserved praise for her book, Ordinary Objects. She defends a commonsense world view and gives us “reason to think that there are fundamental particles, plants and animals, sticks and stones, tables and chairs, and even marriages and mortgages.” (p. 181) Ordinary objects comprise a vast array of things—natural objects both scientific and commonsensical, artifacts, organisms, abstract social objects.
    Material Objects, MiscMaterial ConstitutionCoincident Objects
  •  386
    Content by courtesy
    Journal of Philosophy 84 (4): 197-213. 1987.
    Narrow Content
  •  92
    Materialism with a human face
    In Kevin Corcoran (ed.), Soul, body, and survival: essays on the metaphysics of human persons, Cornell University Press. 2001.
    Persons, MiscPhysicalism, MiscFormulating PhysicalismTheories of Personal Identity
  •  103
    Science and the Attitudes: A Reply to Sanford
    Behavior and Philosophy 24 (2): 187-189. 1996.
    Explaining Attitudes was not intended to be hostile to science. Its target is what I called the Standard View, a conception of the attitudes that is held almost universally. The heart of the Standard View is the thesis that beliefs (and other..
    Propositional Attitudes
  •  257
    Reply to Oppy's fool
    with G. B. Matthews
    Analysis 71 (2): 303-303. 2011.
    Anselm: I agreed that Pegasus is a flying horse according to the stories people tell, the paintings painters paint and so on . That is, Pegasus is a flying horse in the understanding of storytellers, their readers and the artists who depict Pegasus. You asked whether flying is not an unmediated causal power . Well, it could be an unmediated causal power if you or I had it, but not if a being with only mediated powers had it. And so poor Pegasus, a being whose powers are only those given him by s…Read more
    Anselm: I agreed that Pegasus is a flying horse according to the stories people tell, the paintings painters paint and so on . That is, Pegasus is a flying horse in the understanding of storytellers, their readers and the artists who depict Pegasus. You asked whether flying is not an unmediated causal power . Well, it could be an unmediated causal power if you or I had it, but not if a being with only mediated powers had it. And so poor Pegasus, a being whose powers are only those given him by storytellers and artists, has only the mediated power of flying that they have given him. He flies in the thoughts and depictions of beings with unmediated powers. Still, Pegasus has not only the mediated power to fly but also the mediated power to entertain us, and perhaps even inspire us. Fool: But people could tell stories about you, too, about how you sprouted wings and flew onto the roof of Canterbury Cathedral. Anselm: Alas, if it were only in stories that I could do that, then flying would not be an unmediated causal power of mine. I would still have unmediated causal powers all right, and so would be greater than Pegasus. But flying is not one of my unmediated causal powers. However, something than which nothing greater can be conceived would, and does, as I have proved in my Proslogion, have unmediated causal powers – indeed, much greater unmediated causal powers than any poor mortals like you and me.1 •↵1 For …
    Dispositions and PowersPowers
  •  94
    Judgment and Justification
    Philosophical Review 100 (3): 481. 1991.
  •  212
    Why computers can't act
    American Philosophical Quarterly 18 (2): 157-163. 1981.
    To be an agent, one must be able to formulate intentions. To be able to formulate intentions, one must have a first-person perspective. Computers lack a first-person perspective. So, computers are not agents.
    Artificial Minds, MiscSpecific Agentive PhenomenaAgencySelf-Consciousness in ActionThe Nature of Act…Read more
    Artificial Minds, MiscSpecific Agentive PhenomenaAgencySelf-Consciousness in ActionThe Nature of Action, Misc
  •  972
    Why Constitution is Not Identity
    Journal of Philosophy 94 (12): 599. 1997.
    Material ConstitutionEssence and Essentialism, MiscCoincident Objects
  •  398
    First-personal aspects of agency
    Metaphilosophy 42 (1-2): 1-16. 2011.
    On standard accounts, actions are caused by reasons (Davidson), and reasons are taken to be neural phenomena. Since neural phenomena are wholly understandable from a third-person perspective, standard views have no room for any ineliminable first-personal elements in an account of the causation of action. This article aims to show that first-person perspectives play essential roles in both human and nonhuman agency. Nonhuman agents have rudimentary first-person perspectives, whereas human agents…Read more
    On standard accounts, actions are caused by reasons (Davidson), and reasons are taken to be neural phenomena. Since neural phenomena are wholly understandable from a third-person perspective, standard views have no room for any ineliminable first-personal elements in an account of the causation of action. This article aims to show that first-person perspectives play essential roles in both human and nonhuman agency. Nonhuman agents have rudimentary first-person perspectives, whereas human agents—at least rational agents and moral agents—have robust first-person perspectives. The author concludes with a view of intentional causation, according to which reasons are constituted by (but not identical to) neural phenomena. The idea of constitution without identity allows for a causal account of action that automatically includes first-personal aspects of agency.
    The Nature of Action, MiscCausal Theory of ActionFirst-Person Contents
  •  74
    Recent work in the philosophy of mind
    Philosophical Books 30 (January): 1-9. 1989.
    Philosophy of Mind, General Works
  •  184
    Pereboom's Robust Nonreductive Physicalism
    Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (3): 736-744. 2013.
    Nonreductive Materialism
  •  244
    Three-Dimensionalism Rescued: A Brief Reply to Michael Della Rocca
    Journal of Philosophy 110 (3): 166-170. 2013.
    Three- and Four-Dimensionalism
  •  111
    Comment on William Hasker's “The Goodness of the Creator: An Open Theist Perspective”
    Here’s what I intend to do. First, I want to summarize the paper as I see it. Then, as a philosopher is expected to do, I’ll present some questions and disagreements—both substantive and methodological—with Open Theism. Finally, despite the fact that I am an outsider, I want to comment on the debate over Open Theism within certain evangelical circles.
    Philosophy of ReligionThe Number of Gods
  •  94
    On being one's own person
    In Maureen Sie, Marc Slors & Bert van den Brink (eds.), Reasons of one's own, Ashgate. 2004.
    Persons, MiscAgencyMoral Psychology
  •  128
    On the twofold nature of artefacts: As response to Wybo Houkes and Anthonie Meijers, “The ontology of artefacts: the hard problem”
    Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 132-136. 2006.
    “Form follows function,” the slogan of modernist architecture, could well be a slogan of artefacts generally. Since the choice of material for a tool is guided by the function of the tool, we may be tempted to think that having a functional nature distinguishes artefacts from natural objects. But that would be a mistake. Certain natural objects—especially biological entities like mammalian hearts—have functional natures too.
    Artifacts
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback