Abstract

I will try to argue against the intelligibility of traditional scepticism about other minds. My main point is that this position is incoherent. For it requires two incompatible assumptions: a certain conception of introspection and a certain conception of the I. The master argument I will use is not original: it is based on an interpretation of classical discussions about the subject of experiences. It is the acceptance of this reductive argument that explains certain crucial developments in the history of 20th century analytical philosophy