Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:07:10.100Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Behaviourist Foundation of Sellars' Semantics*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2010

Ausonio Marras
Ausonio Marras
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is well known that Sellars' account of linguistic meaning is closely linked to a framework of Rylean-behaviouristic concepts. It is far from clear, however, what the nature of this relation exactly is. Some (e.g., Chisholm, [2], 523) have construed this relation as conceptually so tight as to commit Sellars to logical behaviourism about meaning: semantical statements would be shorthand ways of talking about overt verbal and nonverbal behaviour and behavioural dispositions. On the other hand, some (e.g., J. Young, [18]), have construed the relation so loosely as to deny that the behaviouristic framework can possibly provide a conceptually adequate basis for understanding semantical discourse.

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 16 , Issue 4 , December 1977 , pp. 664 - 675
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1Bandura, A., Principles of Behavior Modification (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969).Google Scholar
2The Chisholm-Sellars Correspondence on Intentionality, in Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. II, edited by Feigl, H. and others (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1958).Google Scholar
3Dulany, D.E., “Awareness, Rules, and Propositional Controls: A Confrontation with S-R Behavior Theory”, in Horton, D. and Dixon, T., Editors, Verbal Behavior and S-R Behavior Theory (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1967).Google Scholar
4Horton, D.L. & Turnage, T.W., Human Learning (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1976).Google Scholar
5Marras, A., “Sellars on Thought and Language”, Nous 7 (1973), 152–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Marras, A., “On Sellars' Linguistic Theory of Conceptual Activity”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 2(1973), 471–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Marras, A., “Sellars' Behaviorism: A Reply to Fred Wilson” Philosophical Studies, forthcoming.Google Scholar
8Osgood, C.E., “Behavior Theory and the Social Sciences”, in Jakoborits, L.A. and Miron, M.S., Editors, Readings in the Psychology of Language (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1967).Google Scholar
9Sellars, W., “Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind”, in Sellars, W., Science, Perception and Reality (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963).Google Scholar
10Sellars, W., “The Language of Theories”, in Science, Perception and RealityGoogle Scholar
11Sellars, W., “Notes on Intentionality”, Journal of Philosophy 61 (1964), 655–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Sellars, W., “Empiricism and Abstract Entities”, in Schilpp, P.A., Editor, The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap (La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, 1963).Google Scholar
13Sellars, W., “The Identity Approach to the Mind-Body Problem” in O'Connor, J., Editor, Modern Materialism: Readings on Mind-Body Identity (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1969).Google Scholar
14Sellars, W., Science and Metaphysics (New York: Humanities Press, 1968).Google Scholar
15Sellars, W., “Meaning as Functional Classification”, Synthese 27 (1974), 417–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16Spielberger, C.D., “Theoretical and Epistemological Issues in Verbal Conditioning”, in Rosenberg, S., Editor, Directions in Psycholinguistics (New York: Macmillan, 1965).Google Scholar
17Wilson, F., “Marras on Sellars on Thought and Language” Philosophical Studies 28 (1975), 91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Young, J., “Intentionality”, Review of Metaphysics 26 (1973), 696–722.Google Scholar