Pain, Injury and First/Third-Person Asymmetry

Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 56 (1):125-136 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Philosophers are wont to say that certain concepts, e.g., the concept of pain, exhibit ‘first/third-person asymmetry’, whereas others, e.g., the concept of injury, do not. The question I wish to address here concerns the status of such claims. They are commonly seen as nothing more than summary reports of how the relevant words are ordinarily used: as statements of ‘grammatical fact’. I want to argue against this view of their status.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,991

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Pain, injury, and first/third-person asymmetry.Katherine J. Morris - 1996 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 56 (1):125-56.
Self‐Knowledge, Responsibility, and the Third Person.Bernard Reginster - 2004 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 69 (2):433-436.
The Pains of R‐George, Robot.Frank R. Harrison - 1971 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 9 (4):371-380.
First-Person Propositions.Peter W. Hanks - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (1):155-182.
Variabilism Is Not the Solution to the Asymmetry.Per Algander - 2015 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 4 (1):1-9.
An Asymmetry Concerning Virtue and Vice.James A. Montmarquet - 1998 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 28 (2):149-159.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-16

Downloads
20 (#791,956)

6 months
5 (#711,375)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references