Abstract
If we were to look caref ully at recent commentary on Descartes's theories of ideas and Sensation, we would find that a large number of commentators hold that he believes the following:.(1)Ideas are representational,(2)Sensations are ideas,(3)Sensations are not representational.This is an inconsistent triad: any two of the above claims can be true together, but they cannot all be true together. The inconsistent triad can be avoided if we reject one of the claims. Some have argued that Descartes did not hold (l).1 Some have argued that he did not hold (3). I believe that Descartes held (1) and (3), and will argue that he did not hold (2).Generally, any account of Cartesian Sensation at the very least must account for sensations in terms of the ontology. The account must say whether they are modes or not, and if modes, modes of what — mind, body, both, the union, and so on. Moreover, how sensations are cast in terms of the ontology must agree with how they are cast in terms of the epistemology.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference14 articles.
1. Material Falsity in Descartes, Arnauld, and Suarez
2. Descartes on Sensory Representation: A Study of the Dioptrics;MacKenzie;Canadian Journal of Philosophy,
3. Sensation, Intentionality and Animal Consciousness;Jolley;Ratio (New Series),,1995
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献