[hist-analytic] Davidson's 'Under a description' Trick

Danny Frederick danny.frederick at tiscali.co.uk
Sat Jan 31 15:35:55 EST 2009

Hi Steve,



<<If you cannot articulate the description, how do you know it exists?>>



My answer would be that there was something I was trying to do, so to that
extent I had an idea of what I was trying to do; and if I succeeded in doing
it, then the action exemplified that idea. And this is so whether or not I
can articulate that idea. I agree that Davidson would probably regard this
response as unwelcome, since he does not like intensions, so I acknowledge
that you may indeed have raised a problem for Davidson (I would have to
check his writings to be sure). But the problem for Davidson is not
necessarily a problem for one who follows the principles of his analysis but
substitutes ideas for descriptions.



<<Notice that you have conveniently (?) altered the description,
substituting 'the usual way' for 'in just the way *required*'>>



Yes, I did, didn't I?





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rbjones.com/pipermail/hist-analytic_rbjones.com/attachments/20090131/0f563e14/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the hist-analytic mailing list