Stich S, Ravenscroft I
Philosophy Department, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903-0270.
Cognition. 1994 Apr-Jun;50(1-3):447-68. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90040-x.
Eliminativism has been a major focus of discussion in the philosophy of mind for the last two decades. According to eliminativists, beliefs and other intentional states are the posits of a folk theory of mind standardly called "folk psychology". That theory, they claim, is radically false and hence beliefs and other intentional states do not exist. We argue that the expression "folk psychology" is ambiguous in an important way. On the one hand, "folk psychology" is used by many philosophers and cognitive scientists to refer to an internally represented theory of human psychology exploited in the prediction of behavior. On the other hand, "folk psychology" is used to refer to the theory of mind implicit in our everyday talk about mental states. We then argue that sorting out the conceptual and terminological confusion surrounding "folk psychology" has major consequences for the eliminativism debate. In particular, if certain models of cognition turn out to be true, then on some readings of "folk psychology" the arguments for elimination collapse.
在过去二十年中,消除主义一直是心灵哲学讨论的一个主要焦点。根据消除主义者的观点,信念及其他意向状态是一种通常被称为“民间心理学”的民间心灵理论所设定的东西。他们声称,该理论是完全错误的,因此信念及其他意向状态并不存在。我们认为,“民间心理学”这一表述在一个重要方面存在歧义。一方面,许多哲学家和认知科学家用“民间心理学”来指称一种在行为预测中被运用的、内在表征的人类心理学理论。另一方面,“民间心理学”被用来指称我们日常关于心理状态的谈论中所隐含的心灵理论。然后我们论证,理清围绕“民间心理学”的概念和术语混乱,对消除主义辩论有着重大影响。特别是,如果某些认知模型被证明是正确的,那么在“民间心理学”的某些解读下,消除主义的论证就会瓦解。