Switch to: References

Citations of:

The Embodied Descartes: Contemporary Readings of L’Homme

In Stephen Gaukroger & Delphine Antoine-Mahut (eds.), Descartes' Treatise on Man and Its Reception. Springer (2016)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. ¿Es cartesiano el “teatro cartesiano” de Dennett?: Un análisis crítico desde el trialismo y el ens per se.Rodrigo Alfonso González Fernández & Felipe Morales Carbonell - 2024 - Anales Del Seminario de Historia de la Filosofía 41 (1):143-153.
    Este artículo examina cómo la separabilidad y unidad mente-cuerpo resultan clave para poner de manifiesto lo inapropiado del “teatro cartesiano”, metáfora creada por Daniel Dennett para criticar la experiencia consciente unificada en Descartes. La primera sección introduce al problema de la separabilidad cartesiana. La segunda examina cómo mente y cuerpo, separables mediante lo concebible según Descartes, resultan ser cosas metafísicamente distintas. La tercera enfatiza como separables no implica separados. La última sección enfatiza el argumento de la dis-analogía del piloto y (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Atheist Therapy: Radical Embodiment in Early Modern Medical Materialism.Charles Wolfe - forthcoming - Diametros:1-16.
    Materialism as a doctrine is, of course, a part of the history of philosophy, even if it was often a polemical construct, and it took until the 18th century for philosophers to be willing to call themselves materialists. Difficulties also have been pointed out in terms of “continuity,” i.e., does what Democritus, Lucretius, Hobbes and Diderot have to say about matter, the body and the soul all belong in one discursive and conceptual frame? Interestingly, materialism is also a classic figure (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • X—Disjunctivism and Cartesian Idealization.Mazviita Chirimuuta - 2022 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 122 (3):218-238.
    This paper examines the dispute between Burge and McDowell over methodology in the philosophy of perception. Burge (2005, 2011) has argued that the disjunctivism posited by naive perceptual realists is incompatible with the results of current perceptual science, while McDowell (2010, 2013) defends his disjunctivism by claiming an autonomous field of enquiry for perceptual epistemology, one that does not employ the classificatory schemes of the science. Here it is argued that the crucial point at issue in the dispute is Burge’s (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark