Sofia Ines Albornoz Stein

In this paper, I argue in favor of a view on the nature of the human mind that is neither a reductionist physicalism nor any kind of dualism, whether of substance or property. I support neutral perspectivism, inspired by neutral monism, with a scientific and materialist content, which allows for the inclusion of conscious phenomenal experiences as part of causal chains of perceptive, emotional, cognitive and deliberative processes. Although there are still no theories, laws and data that allow a final decision on the role of conscious phenomenal experiences in physical-chemical processes in the body, evidence collected in recent decades does not only strengthen our belief in the correlation between physical-chemical events and qualitative conscious experiences but also increases the number of reasons in favor of the thesis that these experiences do have an important functional role in the processes of collection and use of information by the organism.

“Como duas mentes podem conhecer uma única coisa” é um dos textos que Wil-liam James (1842-1910) pretendia reunir sob o nome de Ensaios sobre empirismo radi-cal, embora nunca tenha chegado a ver o projeto concluído. Trata-se da obra tardia do autor, quando este passou a desenvolver algumas das ideias que já se encontravam, em muitos casos de forma embrionária, no monumental Princípios de psicologia. “Como duas mentes podem conhecer uma única coisa” é um dos textos mais importantes desse esforço, uma vez que explica, de forma clara e elegante, um dos pilares do empirismo radical. Como o título já diz, James pretende mostrar como algo pode ser conhecido por duas mentes sem que haja aí uma duplicação, ou um recurso à noção de representação como duplicação de um objeto físico. James postula o conceito de experiência pura e indivisa que se desenvolve em estados de experiências momentâneas sucessivas. A experiência pura acrescenta a consciência à percepção de objetos. Nessa experiência indivisível ocorrem “apropriações” conscientes — que se dão de forma retroativa — das sensações dos objetos pelos sentidos. A consciência conquistada nessa apropriação marca a subjetivação e se dá a partir da inserção do algo sensível, resultante da relação com um objeto físico, na experiência individual. No instante da experiência pura, o objeto é ao mesmo tempo objetivo e subjetivo, não ocorrendo uma duplicação ontológica. Aí reside a resposta à pergunta posta no título: é possível sentir objetos sem duplicá-los.

The use of new paradigms of false belief tasks (FBT) allowed to reduce the age of children who pass the test from the previous 4 years in the standard version to only 15 months or even a striking 6 months in the nonverbal modification. These results are often taken as evidence that infants already possess an—at least implicit—theory of mind (ToM). We criticize this inferential leap on the grounds that inferring a ToM from the predictive success on a false belief task requires to assume as premise that a belief reasoning is a necessary condition for correct action prediction. It is argued that the FBT does not satisfactorily constrain the predictive means, leaving room for the use of belief-independent inferences (that can rely on the attribution of non-representational mental states or the consideration of behavioral patterns that dispense any reference to other minds). These heuristics, when applied to the FBT, can achieve the same predictive success of a belief-based inference because information provided by the test stimulus allows the recognition of particular situations that can be subsumed by their ‘laws’. Instead of solving this issue by designing a single experimentum crucis that would render unfeasible the use of non-representational inferences, we suggest the application of a set of tests in which, although individually they can support inferences dissociated from a ToM, only an inference that makes use of false beliefs is able to correctly predict all the outcomes.

One of the main contributions of philosophers at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century to philosophy of science and semantics was the thesis inspired in the scientific advances of natural and exact sciences, that there is not a single true theory of what goes on in the empirical world, but rather the possibility of constructing multiple versions, equally satisfactory, of an explanation of the world. In the Vienna Circle, more specifically, the conventionalist movement showed its influence primarily in the writings of Neurath, but also, more subtly, in the texts of Carnap. In this paper, I shall examine the theoretical relations between Quine’s holistic thesis and the conventionalist aspects of his work. In order to do this I will discuss Neurath’s holistic coherentism and of the conventionalist and holistic aspects present in Camap’s work, which merge, mainly in the Aufbau, with reduc-tionist aims. Thus, I intend to help to clarify to what extent Quine’s holism depends on a conventionalist position and to what extent conventionalism, in its turn, can get along with reductionist epistemological remains.

This paper is an analysis of some aspects of the constitutional system of Carnap's Logische Aufbau der Welt. It considers two possible interpretations of the autopsychological basis - the elementary experiences - as this concept is used in Carnap's book. Some authors, like Michael Friedman and Moulines, see the Aufbau as a structural system whose forms are not determined by basic experiences - elementary experiences. Others, as for instance Stegmüller, say that the structures, the definitions, within the Aufbau are the result of relations which can be established among those experiences. Following the arguments of these interpreters as well as Carnap's epistemological proposal, I sustain in this paper that it is necessary to think about the autopsychological basis - the elementary experiences - as determining Aufbau's structural relations.

Resumo: Meu objetivo neste artigo é apresentar uma vinculação teórica possível entre uma semântica naturalizada e abordagens metafísicas tradicionais em ontologia. A semântica naturalizada precisa estabelecer algumas pressuposições ontológicas, assim como a ontologia tradicional. Porém o método usado é bem diferente e parece levar a diferentes resultados. Isso é apenas parcialmente correto. A análise conceitual metafísica, que é parte de novas abordagens metafísicas contemporâneas, usa o conhecimento científico de maneira bastante diversa à semântica naturalizada. Porém existe um elo: as reflexões filosóficas acerca de estruturas linguísticas, acerca de expressões linguísticas e suas funções, e acerca da referência e conteúdo dessas expressões. Logo, existe uma sobreposição de método e conteúdo e também uma complementariedade entre a semântica naturalizada e a ontologia analítica contemporânea tradicional, porque ambas focam em funções mentais e linguísticas para poderem pensar sobre o que são objetos. Palavras-chave: Semântica naturalizada; Ontologia; Biosemântica; Referência; Funções linguísticas; Métodos filosófico.

Em intervalos frequentes ao longo dos anos, o professor Chomsky vituperou tanto contra noções do senso comum quanto contra noções técnicas de linguagem pública ou “linguagem externalizada”, afirmando que elas são confusas, mal definidas ou desprovidas de qualquer interesse científico. Como cientista, ele somente estaria interessado na linguagem pública se ela fosse um “objeto real do mundo real” (Chomsky, 1993, p. 39), e não uma noção “artificial” e “arbitrária” (Chomsky, 1985, p. 26). Proponho articular tal noção de linguagem pública para ele. Chomsky também condena a noção que de o propósito da linguagem é a comunicação. Sustentarei, ao contrário, que uma função primária da faculdade humana da linguagem é apoiar convenções linguísticas, e que estas têm uma função essencialmente comunicativa.

The basic assumption present in these articles is that naturalism is highly compatible with a wide range of relevant philosophical questions and that, regardless of the classical problems faced by the naturalist, the price paid in endorsing naturalism is lower than that paid by essentialist or supernaturalist theories. Yet, the reader will find a variety of approaches, from naturalism in Moral Philosophy and Epistemology to naturalism in the Philosophy of Language, Philosophy of Mind and of the Aesthetics.

In this paper, I intend to justify a positive approach to social neuroscience that takes into consideration restrictive philosophical arguments about our—common and scientific—use of mental concepts. I will start with a clarification of the philosophical point of view, which holds that it is impossible to identify others’ mental states as neural states because the language we use to speak about others’ mental states—and our own, too—is a public language. Second, I will show the gap between explanations of social linguistic communication of intentions and reasons for acting and neurological explanations of the human mind. Third, I will use M. D. Lieberman’s Internal/External Reference dichotomy to question whether recent findings in the social neurosciences confirm that many folk psychological concepts refer to external social events rather than internal states. If this is the case, neuroscientific findings show that part of the psychological language use is fundamentally behavioristic, i.e., not about neural states, but about social actions. These actions obviously include bodily and neurological processes, but they are not defined by these. Therefore, if all this is true, neuroscientists are right to be confident that neuroscience can help us to investigate social interactions, but certainly not in a reductive manner¾that is, not by reducing socially used concepts, such as the concept of “intending” to do something, to neural activities; instead, neuroscience can help to establish new and more precise classifications of social behaviors, that have, among their parts, scientifically identifiable flexible neural processes.

Neste artigo, quero explorar a possibilidade de ver as experiências fenomênicas privadas, na linha do que pensava Russell, como detentoras de objetividade, o que possibilitaria vê-las como objetos de investigações científicas. Ou, dito de outro modo, perguntar se seria possível falar cientificamente sobre eventos mentais que chamamos ordinariamente de impressões. Apesar desse problema ser ainda considerado imperscrutável por uma certa filosofia, minha hipótese é a de que, como sustentava Sellars, podemos estar sendo apenas impedidos por erros ou limitações no uso de nosso vocabulário a encontrar uma solução consoante com ao que ambicionava Russell.

This paper deals with Quine's several attempts to define the concept of underdetermination of scientifics theories in some of his articles and with the dependence of this definition on other concepts of Quine's semantic holism. To define "underdetermination", Quine needs to explain the relationship between theory and observation. His position concerning this subject can be criticized, on the one hand, by saying that it gives an insufficient criterion for "underdetermination", and, on the other hand, by asserting that it is still too close to the reductionist's conception of truth.

This paper is an analysis of some aspects of the constitutional system of Carnap's Logische Aufbau der Welt. It considers two possible interpretations of the autopsychological basis - the elementary experiences - as this concept is used in Carnap's book. Some authors, like Michael Friedman and Moulines, see the Aufbau as a structural system whose forms are not determined by basic experiences - elementary experiences. Others, as for instance Stegmüller, say that the structures, the definitions, within the Aufbau are the result of relations which can be established among those experiences. Following the arguments of these interpreters as well as Carnap's epistemological proposal, I sustain in this paper that it is necessary to think about the autopsychological basis - the elementary experiences - as determining Aufbau's structural relations.

In Linguistic Bodies, Ezequiel A. Di Paolo, Elena Clare Cuffari and Hanne De Jaegher propose a dialectic method to explain organism’s movements and exchanges, i.e., life inter-actions and evolution, that can also explain the evolution from life to cultural relations, that include linguistic interactions. One of the main questions Linguistic Bodies wants to answer is how to explain human life and culture without a reductive scientific thought. If one defies radical reductionism, one of the central risks is to dissociate physical inquiries from biological investigations. In the book, the authors oppose the analytical mode of thinking present in many natural sciences to a dialectical mode of thinking that would explain living beings’ interactions. It is relevant to question if they succeeded in defending the dialectical model they profess to be the best suited to explain human social phenomena. Following this line of rationale, in this paper, I will, first, show that dialectical methods are over-ambitious and, second, inquire into the anti-reductionist attitude present in the dialectical model advocated in Linguistic Bodies.Key-words: Linguistic bodies, radical reductionism, dialectical model.

The use of new paradigms of false belief tasks allowed to reduce the age of children who pass the test from the previous 4 years in the standard version to only 15 months or even a striking 6 months in the nonverbal modification. These results are often taken as evidence that infants already possess an—at least implicit—theory of mind. We criticize this inferential leap on the grounds that inferring a ToM from the predictive success on a false belief task requires to assume as premise that a belief reasoning is a necessary condition for correct action prediction. It is argued that the FBT does not satisfactorily constrain the predictive means, leaving room for the use of belief-independent inferences. These heuristics, when applied to the FBT, can achieve the same predictive success of a belief-based inference because information provided by the test stimulus allows the recognition of particular situations that can be subsumed by their ‘laws’. Instead of solving this issue by designing a single experimentum crucis that would render unfeasible the use of non-representational inferences, we suggest the application of a set of tests in which, although individually they can support inferences dissociated from a ToM, only an inference that makes use of false beliefs is able to correctly predict all the outcomes.