Defending Non-Derived Content

Authors: Aizawa, Ken; Adams, Fred

Source: Philosophical Psychology, Volume 18, Number 6, Number 6/December 2005 , pp. 661-669(9)

Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content

Abstract:

In “The Myth of Original Intentionality,” Daniel Dennett appears to want to argue for four claims involving the familiar distinction between original (or underived) and derived intentionality. Humans lack original intentionality.Humans have derived intentionality only.There is no distinction between original and derived intentionality. There is no such thing as original intentionality. We argue that Dennett's discussion fails to secure any of these conclusions for the contents of thoughts.

Keywords: Original Intentionality; Derived Intentionality; Daniel Dennett

Document Type: Research article

DOI: 10.1080/09515080500355186

The full text electronic article is available for purchase. You will be able to download the full text electronic article after payment.

$38.34 plus tax      Refund Policy

 

OR

Back to top

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content
Share this item with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Page Help Click here for Page Help
Shopping cart
Tools
Sign in






Need to register?
Sign up here
Text size: A | A | A | A