A Defence of Lichtenberg

Episteme:1-16 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Cartesians and Lichtenbergians have diverging views of the deliverances of introspection. According to the Cartesians, a rational subject, competent with the relevant concepts, can come to know that he or she thinks – hence, that he or she exists – on the sole basis of his or her introspective awareness of his or her conscious thinking. According to the Lichtenbergians, this is not possible. This paper offers a defence of the Lichtenbergian position using Peacocke and Campbell's recent exchange on Descartes'scogitoas a framework for discussion. A thought-experiment will be presented involving two communities with radically different conceptions of the metaphysics of the self. The purpose of the thought-experiment is to suggest that a substantive metaphysical thesis, whose truth cannot be a priori known, is presupposed by any justified transition from one's introspective awareness of a certain mental activity to the self-ascription of that activity.

Similar books and articles

Introspection distinct from first-order experiences.Morten Overgaard & T. A. Sorenson - 2004 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 11 (7-8):11--7.
Shoemaker, self-blindness and Moore's paradox.Amy Kind - 2003 - Philosophical Quarterly 53 (210):39-48.
Thought insertion and immunity to error through misidentification.Annalisa Coliva - 2002 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 9 (1):27-34.
Georg Christoph Lichtenberg’s Idealism.Steven Tester - 2016 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 54 (2):283-306.
An adverbial theory of consciousness.Alan Thomas - 2003 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 2 (3):161-85.
Externalism and skepticism.Keith Butler - 1998 - Dialogue 37 (1):13-34.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-11-15

Downloads
316 (#8,201)

6 months
98 (#172,876)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Giovanni Merlo
University of Geneva

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Troubles with functionalism.Ned Block - 1978 - Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 9:261-325.
For-me-ness: What it is and what it is not.Dan Zahavi & Uriah Kriegel - 2015 - In D. Dahlstrom, A. Elpidorou & W. Hopp (eds.), Philosophy of mind and phenomenology. New York: Routledge. pp. 36-53.

View all 62 references / Add more references