Nicole Rathgeb

This volume celebrates the work of Hans-Johann Glock, a philosopher renowned for both his exegesis of Wittgenstein and his many contributions to debates in contemporary philosophy. It brings together 16 new essays by up-and-coming and distinguished philosophers engaging with Glock’s work, and it concludes with a "Reflections and Replies" chapter in which Glock responds to his interlocutors. Glock’s distinctive philosophical voice features a rare combination of a Wittgenstein-inspired approach with a willingness to break away from Wittgenstein to tackle problems in an open-minded way. The broad selection of essays included in this volume reflects Glock’s wide-ranging philosophical interests and demonstrates the potential of applying Wittgensteinian insights to advance current systematic debates in philosophy. The chapters discuss Wittgenstein’s philosophy, metaphilosophy, truth and language, animal minds and agency, and reasons and normativity.

In the last decade, various analyses of beliefs in terms of dispositions have been advanced. One principled objection against dispositional accounts of belief is that they cannot accommodate first-person authority. While people can infallibly state their beliefs without the need for any kind of evidence, their assertions about their dispositions are fallible and in need of evidential support. Hence, the argument goes, beliefs are not the same thing as dispositions. In this paper, I defend a linguistic version of dispositionalism against this objection, namely the thesis that the belief that p is the disposition to answer the question whether p in the affirmative. I offer a detailed account of first-person authority with regard to belief, and argue that linguistic dispositionalism can account for first-person authority. Further, I discuss the appeal of dispositionalism, argue that it is a mistake to understand first-person authority primarily as a matter of privileged (epistemic) access, and explain the importance of the distinction between self-ascriptions and manifestations of beliefs and dispositions.

Welchen Status haben mentale Zustände, wie bewusste Empfindungen, Wünsche, Überzeugungen oder Emotionen, in einer physikalischen Welt? Lassen sich alle derartigen Zustände auf Hirnzustände reduzieren? Was genau zeichnet mentale Zustände aus, und was können wir über die mentalen Zustände unserer Mitmenschen wissen? Dieses Handbuch liefert einen systematischen Überblick über Positionen und Fragestellungen in der Philosophie des Geistes. Ein zentrales Themengebiet ist dabei das Verhältnis zwischen mentalen Zuständen und Hirnzuständen: physikalistische und nicht-physikalistische Ansätze sowie das Problem der mentalen Verursachung. Darüber hinaus werden Fragestellungen zum Charakter des Mentalen und zu verschiedenen Typen mentaler Zustände in den Blick genommen, etwa die Debatten über Qualia, Intentionalität, Gedächtnis und das Verhältnis zwischen Denken und Sprache. Abgerundet wird das Bild durch Beiträge zum Thema Willensfreiheit, zur empirischen Erforschung mentaler Zustände sowie zu historischen Positionen in der Leib-Seele-Debatte.

In the first edition of _Language, Truth and Logic_, Ayer defines an analytic proposition as one whose ‘validity depends solely on the definitions of the symbols it contains’. In the introduction to the second edition of the book, he defines it as a proposition that is ‘true solely in virtue of the meaning of its constituent symbols’. In this paper, I spell out how the two formulations are to be understood and how they relate to each other. I discuss a problem that arises in connection with the question whether definitions are analytic or synthetic before elaborating Ayer’s conception of propositions and his explanation of the necessity of analytic truths. Furthermore, I respond to the idea that propositions such as ‘Nothing can be red and blue all over at the same time’ are true independently of what words mean and, hence, cannot be true in virtue of meaning.