José Luis Bermúdez defends the view that inner speech is necessary for thinking about thoughts, what he calls ‘intentional ascent’. On his account, we can only take a thought as an object of further thought if the target thought is “held in mind” in inner speech in a way that its canonical structure is revealed. Two paradigm cases exemplify this view: reflexive evaluation and propositional mindreading. In this article, we examine Bermúdez’s view and argue that 1) the process of intentional ascen…
Read moreJosé Luis Bermúdez defends the view that inner speech is necessary for thinking about thoughts, what he calls ‘intentional ascent’. On his account, we can only take a thought as an object of further thought if the target thought is “held in mind” in inner speech in a way that its canonical structure is revealed. Two paradigm cases exemplify this view: reflexive evaluation and propositional mindreading. In this article, we examine Bermúdez’s view and argue that 1) the process of intentional ascent via inner speech is empirically untenable and psychologically unrealistic, and that 2) the view, in demanding that words reveal the canonical structure of thoughts, runs into a dilemma where inner speech becomes either superfluous or inaccurately described. We finish by gesturing towards a more encompassing view of the role of inner speech in thinking that, while rejecting Bermúdez’s more problematic claims, maintains his main insight of the relevant role of inner speech for human cognition.
