Biological rationalism

Abstract

I argue that contemporary philosophy of language in the analytic tradition rests on two fundamentally wrong assumptions: empiricism and externalism. After I show why these two assumptions are incorrect, I turn my attention to biological rationalism. Biological rationalism—a research program inspired by the work of Noam Chomsky—is committed to nativism and internalism. I believe biological rationalism provides the best framework to achieve a genuine understanding of language. I try to show this by considering the biological rationalist answers to major problems in philosophy of language

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

The roots of critical rationalism.John Wettersten (ed.) - 1992 - Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.
Between Chomskian rationalism and Popperian empiricism.Stephen P. Stich - 1979 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 30 (4):329-47.
What's Wrong with the New Biological Essentialism.Marc Ereshefsky - 2010 - Philosophy of Science 77 (5):674-685.
Language: A Biological Model.Ruth Garrett Millikan - 2005 - Oxford, GB: Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Normality as a biological concept.Robert Wachbroit - 1994 - Philosophy of Science 61 (4):579-591.
On the uniqueness of biological research.Adolph Portmann - 1990 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 15 (5):457-472.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
127 (#138,381)

6 months
5 (#544,079)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Steve McKay
Cégep de Sherbrooke

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references