"X" means X: Fodor/Warfield semantics

Fred Adams, Kenneth Aizawa

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

In an earlier paper, we argued that Fodorian Semantics has serious difficulties. However, we suggested possible ways that one might attempt to fix this. Ted Warfield suggests that our arguments can be deflected and he does this by making the very moves that we suggested. In our current paper, we respond to Warfield's attempts to revise and defend Fodorian Semantics against our arguments that such a semantic theory is both too strong and too weak. To get around our objections, Warfield proposes a modified reading of one of Fodor's conditions and proposes adding a new condition to the theory. We show that neither the modified reading nor the additional condition saves the asymmetric causal dependency approach to naturalized semantics.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)215-231
Number of pages17
JournalMinds and Machines
Volume4
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 1994
Externally publishedYes

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Philosophy
  • Artificial Intelligence

Keywords

  • Fodor
  • Meaning
  • Twin-Earth
  • actual
  • asymmetric causal dependency
  • disjunction problem
  • information
  • naturalized semantics
  • representation

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of '"X" means X: Fodor/Warfield semantics'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this