Show simple item record  

dc.contributor.authorLumsden, Daviden_US
dc.date.accessioned2008-03-19T04:57:01Z
dc.date.available2007-09-04en_US
dc.date.available2008-03-19T04:57:01Z
dc.date.issued1993-07-01en_US
dc.identifier.citationLumsden, D. (1993). Critical discussion of Daniel C. Dennett, The Intentional Stance. Erkenntnis: An International Journal of Analytic Philosophy, 39(1), 101-109.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10289/447
dc.description.abstractDaniel Dennett spends a good bit of time defending the possibility of a compromise position on the reality of beliefs and desires. It will be claimed that a puzzle remains in the interpretation of Dennett's position. In earlier works one finds a theme, which we can call 'near-fatalism', which has not been integrated with the kind of middle ground he describes. But the near-fatalism theme is dropped in later work. Is it because it is felt to be incompatible with that middle ground compromise? It is not obviously so.en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen
dc.relation.urihttp://www.springerlink.com/content/102879/en_US
dc.rightsThis article is the authors postprint version of an article published in the journal, Erkenntnis, Vol 39. The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com.en_US
dc.subjectDennetten_US
dc.subjectnear-fatalismen_US
dc.titleCritical discussion of Daniel C. Dennett, The Intentional Stance.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/BF01128205en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record