No description available.

Error theorists about race face a challenge from the occurrence of diseases and other health ailments that, appear, to be tracked by groups that are carved out by racial terms. If race does indeed allow us to make useful medical distinctions, then it would seem foolish or even a form of medical injustice to deny its reality. This paper provides a response to the stated challenge. First, by primarily using the work of Anthony Appiah, I will describe the error theorist position and its arguments for the non-reality of race. From here, I demonstrate the extent to which medical professionals grant the race is a scientifically arbitrary term and give arguments for accepting race as an alternative that may even be more medically useful. Finally, I advance an eliminativist argument to further motivate the notion that race, if it is truly not necessary, should be eliminated from use. / Master of Arts / Error theorists about race face a challenge from the occurrence of diseases and other health ailments that, appear, to be tracked by groups that are carved out by racial terms. If race does indeed allow us to make useful medical distinctions, then it would seem foolish or even a form of medical injustice to deny its reality. This paper provides a response to the stated challenge. First, by primarily using the work of Anthony Appiah, I will describe the error theorist position and its arguments for the non-reality of race. From here, I demonstrate the extent to which medical professionals grant the race is a scientifically arbitrary term and give arguments for accepting race as an alternative that may even be more medically useful. Finally, I advance an eliminativist argument to further motivate the notion that race, if it is truly not necessary, should be eliminated from use.

Ontic structural realism is the view that structure is fundamental. This view is at odds with a long-standing tradition in metaphysics which takes the fundamental structure of reality to consist of individuals. Steven French argues in favour of an eliminativist ontic structural realism which is supposed to eliminate individuals, as well as other objects, from the category of fundamentalia. There have also been more moderate attempts where 'non-individuals' are encompassed in the framework. In this paper, I make two interconnected claims. Firstly, that any moderate version of ontic structural realism is too weak to be included in the ontic structural realism familiy since the view fails to satisfy the motivations for employing any kind of ontic structural realism in the first place. Secondly, that if we want to formulate an ontic structural realist view that delivers on the claim that there are no fundamentalia apart from structure we will not find a satisfying view in French's oeuvre.

A literatura filosófica sobre a Psicologia do Senso Comum se estende desde a década de 1970, e abrange diversas questões sobre nosso entendimento interpessoal cotidiano, nossa capacidade de interação e coordenação de atividades, o arcabouço conceitual intuitivo que relaciona estados mentais e atitudes proposicionais a comportamentos, e os mecanismos cognitivos de leitura mental que nos permitem atribuir estados mentais a outras pessoas. Nesta dissertação eu examino o desenvolvimento histórico desta literatura, identificando dois debates distintos, o primeiro (principalmente entre Paul Churchland e Jerry Fodor dos anos 70 aos anos 90) tendo como foco a relação entre a teoria da Psicologia do Senso Comum e teorias científicas (da neurociência e das ciências cognitivas), e o segundo (o debate contemporâneo) tendo como foco os mecanismos cognitivos de leitura mental e o papel das atribuições de estados mentais e atitudes proposicionais nas teorias da cognição corporificada, situada e estendida. Além do exame histórico do que argumento serem dois debates distintos e da transição conceitual entre ambos, também apresento aqui minha crítica à abordagem eliminativista contemporânea de Matthew Ratcliffe e, como alternativa, articulo os princípios de uma abordagem pluralista que combina leitura mental e interpretação contextual situada como fundamentais para a cognição social / The philosophical literature on Folk Psychology began in the 1970s, and encompasses various questions about our everyday interpersonal understanding, our ability to interact and coordinate activities, the intuitive conceptual framework that relates mental states and propositional attitudes to behaviors, and the cognitive mechanisms of mindreading that allow us to attribute mental states to other people. In this thesis I examine the historical development of this literature, identifying two distinct debates, the first (mainly between Paul Churchland and Jerry Fodor from the 70s to the 90s) focusing on the relationship between the theory of Folk Psychology and scientific theories (in neuroscience and cognitive science), and the second (the contemporary debate) focusing on the cognitive mechanisms of mindreading and the role played by attributions of mental states and propositional attitudes in theories of embodied, situated and extended cognition. In addition to the historical examination of what I argue are two distinct debates as well as of the conceptual transition between them, here I present my criticism of Matthew Ratcliffe\'s contemporary eliminativist approach and, as an alternative to it, I articulate the principles of a pluralistic approach that combines both mindreading and situated contextual interpretation as fundamental for social cognition

A literatura filosófica sobre a Psicologia do Senso Comum se estende desde a década de 1970, e abrange diversas questões sobre nosso entendimento interpessoal cotidiano, nossa capacidade de interação e coordenação de atividades, o arcabouço conceitual intuitivo que relaciona estados mentais e atitudes proposicionais a comportamentos, e os mecanismos cognitivos de leitura mental que nos permitem atribuir estados mentais a outras pessoas. Nesta dissertação eu examino o desenvolvimento histórico desta literatura, identificando dois debates distintos, o primeiro (principalmente entre Paul Churchland e Jerry Fodor dos anos 70 aos anos 90) tendo como foco a relação entre a teoria da Psicologia do Senso Comum e teorias científicas (da neurociência e das ciências cognitivas), e o segundo (o debate contemporâneo) tendo como foco os mecanismos cognitivos de leitura mental e o papel das atribuições de estados mentais e atitudes proposicionais nas teorias da cognição corporificada, situada e estendida. Além do exame histórico do que argumento serem dois debates distintos e da transição conceitual entre ambos, também apresento aqui minha crítica à abordagem eliminativista contemporânea de Matthew Ratcliffe e, como alternativa, articulo os princípios de uma abordagem pluralista que combina leitura mental e interpretação contextual situada como fundamentais para a cognição social / The philosophical literature on Folk Psychology began in the 1970s, and encompasses various questions about our everyday interpersonal understanding, our ability to interact and coordinate activities, the intuitive conceptual framework that relates mental states and propositional attitudes to behaviors, and the cognitive mechanisms of mindreading that allow us to attribute mental states to other people. In this thesis I examine the historical development of this literature, identifying two distinct debates, the first (mainly between Paul Churchland and Jerry Fodor from the 70s to the 90s) focusing on the relationship between the theory of Folk Psychology and scientific theories (in neuroscience and cognitive science), and the second (the contemporary debate) focusing on the cognitive mechanisms of mindreading and the role played by attributions of mental states and propositional attitudes in theories of embodied, situated and extended cognition. In addition to the historical examination of what I argue are two distinct debates as well as of the conceptual transition between them, here I present my criticism of Matthew Ratcliffe\'s contemporary eliminativist approach and, as an alternative to it, I articulate the principles of a pluralistic approach that combines both mindreading and situated contextual interpretation as fundamental for social cognition

Dans cette thèse je défends l'élimination des concepts d'attitudes propositionnelles. Dans le premier chapitre, je présente les thèses éliminativistes en philosophie de l'esprit et des sciences cognitives contemporaines. Il y a deux types d'éliminativisme: le matérialisme éliminatif et l'éliminativisme des concepts. Il est possible d'éliminer les concepts soit des théories naïves soit des théories scientifiques. L'éliminativisme à propos des concepts d'attitudes propositionnelles que je défends requière le second type d'élimination. Dans les trois chapitres suivants je donne trois arguments en faveur de cette thèse. Je commence par soutenir que la théorie interventionniste de la causalité ne fonde pas nos jugements de causalité mentale. Ensuite je montre que nos concepts d'attitudes propositionnelles ne sont pas des concepts d'espèces naturelles car ils groupent ensemble les états des différents modules d'une architecture massivement modulaire, la thèse de modularité massive faisant partie, je l'affirme, de notre meilleur programme de recherche. Finalement, mon troisième argument repose sur l’élimination du concept de contenu mental de nos théories. Dans les deux derniers chapitres de la thèse, je défends ce dernier argument. Tout d'abord, je réfute l'argument du succès selon lequel étant donné que les psychologues emploient le concept de contenu mental et ce faisant produisent de la bonne science ce concept ne devrait pas être éliminé. Ensuite je rejette une autre façon d'éliminer ce concept, celle choisie par les théoriciens de la cognition étendue. Pour cela je réfute le meilleur argument qui a été donné en faveur de cette thèse: l'argument du système. / In this dissertation, I argue for the elimination of propositional attitudes concepts. In the first chapter I sketch the landscape of eliminativism in contemporary philosophy of mind and cognitive science. There are two kinds of eliminativism: eliminative materialism and concept eliminativism. One can further distinguish between folk and science eliminativism about concepts: whereas the former says that the concept should be eliminated from our folk theories, the latter says that the concept should be eliminated form our scientific theories. The eliminativism about propositional attitudes concepts I defend is a species of the latter. In the next three chapters I put forward three arguments for this thesis. I first argue that the interventionist theory of causation cannot lend credit to our claims of mental causation. I then support the thesis by showing that propositional attitudes concepts aren't natural kind concepts because they cross-cut the states of the modules posited by the thesis of massive modularity, a thesis which, I contend, is part of our best research-program. Finally, my third argument rests on science eliminativism about the concept of mental content. In the two last chapters of the dissertation I first defend the elimination of the concept of mental content from the success argument, according to which as psychologists produce successful science while using the concept of mental content, the concept should be conserved. Then, I dismiss an alternative way of eliminating the concept, that is, the way taken by proponents of extended cognition, by refuting what I take to be the best argument for extended cognition, namely, the system argument.

L’objectif de cette thèse est de fournir un cadre théorique pour l’analyse philosophique des pratiques classificatoires en sciences. La classification, définie comme étant un geste épistémique dont l’objectif est de fournir une description du monde par découpage et discrimination, et par mise en relation des catégories ainsi formées, est un point de rencontre naturel entre philosophie et sciences. La tradition des espèces naturelles, considérée en philosophie des sciences comme la principale approche disponible pour l’analyse des pratiques classificatoires, est toutefois lacunaire. Dans le cadre de cette thèse, je démontre les faiblesses de cette approche et le besoin de mobiliser d’autres ressources épistémologiques pour penser la classification. À cet effet, je m’inspire de travaux en philosophie de la mesure s’inscrivant dans un courant de pensée que j’appelle le cohérentisme historique. Ces approches mettent l’accent sur les pratiques inférentielles et sur la charge théorique des observations en plus d’insister sur le dynamisme scientifique et la multitude de facteurs qui l’influencent (principe de respect, impératif de progrès, développements théoriques, nouveaux outils [mathématiques ou matériels], nouvelles données, histoire du champ disciplinaire, structure sociale de la recherche, etc.). Une fois ce cadre d’analyse épistémologique présenté en détail, je le mobilise pour étudier un ensemble de pratiques classificatoires en sciences, soit les pratiques phylogénétiques contemporaines. La phylogénétique est la discipline biologique qui vise à retracer les liens généalogiques qui unissent les êtres vivants. Les gènes et organismes sont ainsi regroupés au sein d’unités taxonomiques qui sont par la suite mises en relation. Ce champ disciplinaire a longtemps été associé de façon intime et exclusive au modèle arborescent, lui-même associé à la théorie de l’évolution par voie de sélection naturelle : les liens phylogénétiques entre organismes sont généralement représentés sous la forme d’un arbre, soit l’Arbre du vivant. Or, les dernières décennies ont vu émerger, au sein de la discipline, un compétiteur : le modèle réticulé. En analysant les différences et similarités qui lient ces deux types de modèles (modèles arborescents et modèles réseaux), je démontre que la transition d’un modèle à l’autre n’influence que superficiellement la pratique puisque la majorité de ses déterminants demeure inchangée. En bref, cette thèse présente un cadre d’analyse philosophique pour appréhender les pratiques classificatoires en sciences. J’importe des principes et des outils issus de travaux de la philosophie de la mesure afin de développer une philosophie de la classification qui comble les lacunes de la tradition des espèces naturelles. En s’ancrant dans ce que j’appelle le cohérentisme historique, cette thèse contribue non seulement à la bonne compréhension des pratiques classificatoires d’un point de vue épistémologique, mais aussi à la bonne compréhension des pratiques phylogénétiques contemporaines et de l’importante transition qui éloigne cette discipline de son modèle classique, soit l’Arbre du vivant. / The main objective of this dissertation is to offer a philosophical framework for the analysis of scientific classificatory practices. Classification, here defined as an epistemic action that describes the world by breaking down phenomena into categories and by establishing relevant relationships between these categories, is a natural bridge between philosophy and science. The tradition of natural kinds, which is currently the main approach in philosophy of science for analysing classificatory practices, has important shortcomings when it comes to epistemologically analyzing scientific classification. In this dissertation, I highlight these weaknesses and the consequent need to develop a novel framework for tackling classificatory practices. To achieve this, I draw on an existing trend in philosophy of measurement, which I coined historical coherentism. This approach is centered on the analysis of inferential practices and stresses the importance of the theoretical charge of observations. It also focuses on the dynamic nature of scientific fields and on the variety of factors that determine scientific progress (principle of respect, imperative of progress, theoretical developments, mathematical and material innovations, new data, the history of a field of research, the social structure of the scientific community, etc.). After the detailed presentation and exploration of this epistemological framework, I use it to tackle a set of scientific classificatory practices, namely contemporary phylogenetic practices. Phylogenetics is the biological discipline that aims to reconstruct the genealogical relationships uniting living beings. Genes and organisms are grouped into operative taxonomic units, and these units are then connected within a system. Since its inception, phylogenetics has been intimately tied to tree-based models, with these tree-based models themselves tied to the theory of evolution by means of natural selection: the phylogenetic system connecting all living organisms takes the form of a tree, the Tree of Life. In the last few decades, however, an alternative type of models has gained more attention and support within the field: network-based models. Using historical coherentism, I analyze the differences and similarities between the two competing types of models (tree-based models and network-based models) and show that the transition from one to the other only superficially changes phylogenetic practices. Indeed, many factors that constrain these practices remain unchanged whether researchers use tree-based or network-based models. In short, this thesis presents a philosophical framework for the analysis of classificatory practices in sciences. I use various principles and tools imported from the philosophy of measurement to develop a philosophy of classification that covers the weaknesses of the tradition of natural kinds. By anchoring my work in historical coherentism, I contribute not only to our understanding of classificatory practices, from an epistemological perspective, but also to a better understanding of contemporary phylogenetic practices and of the significant transition that leads this discipline away from its classical model, the Tree of Life.

Ce travail participe aux recherches contemporaines qui s'attachent à améliorer notre compréhension de ce que nous appelons les « objets d'expérience », et en particulier des objets ordinaires. Il s'arrête sur une dimension qui leur apparaît propre, leur permanence, c'est-à-dire leur continuité spatio-temporelle, telle que nous pouvons la constater et en faire usage dans l'expérience perceptive ou le discours, et leur identité intersubjective – en dépit des différentes visées qu'autrui et moi pouvons avoir sur eux. L'objet est pluriel, son identité, qui n'est pas simplement logique, manque de critères nets, mais cela ne peut remettre en question son existence, comme le voudraient les éliminativistes que nous affrontons. Mais les universalistes, les intellectualistes et tous les idéalistes sémantiques qui, à l'inverse, voient des objets partout, par notre seul pouvoir de les penser, confondent objet réel et objet de pensée. Nous défendons un réalisme contextualiste de l'objet ordinaire qui en précise l'existence dans les contextes où il fait sens d'en parler, et d'abord le contexte perceptif, puisqu'il semble définitoire des normes d'objectification et d'objectivation les plus courantes dans nos pratiques identificatoires, réidentificatoires et catégorisantes, de s'inscrire au sein de la perception et de l'action. Ce sont des processus plus ou moins simples cognitivement et plus ou moins répandus éthologiquement qui sont enjeu selon les cas. Cette pluralité implique d'en explorer les terrains, en particulier dans le plus jeune âge lorsque beaucoup des normes réglant notre saisie cognitive du réel sont en formation. C'est pourquoi notre investigation choisit rapidement de se faire philosophie de la connaissance afin de comprendre la genèse des objets ordinaires dont nous parlons, plutôt que d'essayer de dresser de façon abstraite une liste exhaustive de leurs critères d'identité. Nous défendons que la permanence de l'objet peut être comprise à trois niveaux, perceptif, social et logicolinguistique. Le bébé atteint ces niveaux d'objectivité par des concepts naturels (concepts affordantiels et modules innés, qui ont une inscription corporelle et un développement social), des concepts expérientiels (prototypiques et essentialisants, aidés par nos activités humaines de socialisation et d'attention partagée, qu'on trouve aussi dans le monde animal), et des concepts lexicaux, hérités de notre langue. C'est l'occasion de remettre en cause l'opposition trop facile entre l'inné et l'acquis, ou le nativisme et le constructivisme. À chacun de ces niveaux, il y a des raisons d'utiliser, en un sens non mentaliste mais naturaliste et fonctionnaliste, la notion de représentation, pour comprendre ce qui fait la transcendance de ces objets distaux, traités à partir des stimuli proximaux mais différents d'eux. On peut user d'un discours réaliste à leur sujet, sans présupposer que celui-ci se fonde sur des capacités cognitives rationnelles propositionnelles, synthétiques, inférentielles ou judicatives de haut niveau et nécessairement spécifiques à l'humain, mais sans céder non plus aux oppositions classiques entre réalisme indirect et réalisme direct, ou conceptualisme et non-conceptualisme. De même, on défendra, au-delà des débats entre continuisme et discontinuisme sur l'humain et l'animal, un émergentisme qui pense à la fois la continuité des espèces et leurs différences chaque fois propres dans leur rapport aux objets de leur environnement, tels qu'ils sont visés dans des normes naturelles et sociales. / The understanding of the ordinary objects of our daily experience implies a definition of spatiotemporal and intersubjective levels of permanence. This is due to the fact that these objects, whose existence we defend against eliminativism and mereological nihilism, can be said to endure or perdure, at least in our experiences and our discourses about them. This existence in time and space and between subjects of experience cannot be defined by mere logical features. That is why we choose a contextualist approach of objects, and study perceptual situations where identifications and categorizations occur, especially at the early stages of objectification and objectivation which babies are able to achieve. The newborn and the young child indeed need to gain object permanence, a phenomenon first described by Gestalt psychologists like Michotte and Piaget's school of developmental psychology, and which has been even more accurately studied by cognitive psychologists such as Elizabeth Spelke, Dominique Baillargeon, Susan Carey or Susan Gelman. We defend the thesis that three types of object permanence can be distinguished (perceptual, social and logical-linguistic). Object transcendence can be described as an emergent feature of these stages. Babies acquire these levels of objectivity through normal and universal phases of development, even though different cultural environments can influence rhythms of maturation and the intentional behaviors relating to objects, which children develop. To access ordinary objects, infants need natural concepts (affordantial concepts and innate modular abilities - quite common among animals -, which are embodied and developed through social stimulations), experiential concepts (prototypical and essentialist tendencies, stimulated by joint attention and social phenomena that also occur in the animal world), and inherited lexical concepts. Nativism and constructivism work together and a realist, naturalist and emergentist approach of our cognitions of objects and their representations (understood only as a functional ability to register distal objects from proximal stimuli) enables us to overcome classical oppositions between direct and indirect realism, conceptualism and anti-conceptualism, as well as the continuity-thesis and the discontinuity-thesis between human and non-human beings.