green numbers give full details.
|
back to list of philosophers
|
expand these ideas
Ideas of Donald Davidson, by Text
[American, 1917 - 2003, Born at Springfield, Massachusetts. Pupil of Willard Quine. Professor at the University of Chicago.]
1963
|
Action, Reasons and Causes
|
|
p.4
|
20020
|
If one action leads directly to another, they are all one action [Wilson/Schpall]
|
|
p.103
|
23734
|
The best explanation of reasons as purposes for actions is that they are causal [Smith,M]
|
|
p.113
|
23737
|
Reasons can give purposes to actions, without actually causing them [Smith,M]
|
|
p.116
|
20072
|
We explain an intention by giving an account of acting with an intention [Stout,R]
|
|
p.123
|
20075
|
Early Davidson says intentional action is caused by reasons [Stout,R]
|
|
p.127
|
3395
|
Davidson claims that what causes an action is the reason for doing it [Kim]
|
|
p.185
|
7949
|
Varied descriptions of an event will explain varied behaviour relating to it [Macdonald,C]
|
|
p.259
|
6664
|
Reasons must be causes when agents act 'for' reasons [Lowe]
|
p.3-4
|
p.34
|
20045
|
Acting for a reason is a combination of a pro attitude, and a belief that the action is appropriate
|
|
p.8
|
10371
|
Distinguish causation, which is in the world, from explanations, which depend on descriptions [Schaffer,J]
|
|
p.77
|
4778
|
A singular causal statement is true if it is held to fall under a law [Psillos]
|
|
p.440
|
8403
|
Either facts, or highly unspecific events, serve better as causes than concrete events [Field,H]
|
§3
|
p.157
|
8346
|
Full descriptions can demonstrate sufficiency of cause, but not necessity
|
§4
|
p.161
|
8347
|
Explanations typically relate statements, not events
|
§4
|
p.162
|
8348
|
If we don't assume that events exist, we cannot make sense of our common talk
|
§4
|
p.162
|
8349
|
The best way to do ontology is to make sense of our normal talk
|
1967
|
The Logical Form of Action Sentences
|
|
p.122
|
15002
|
If the best theory of adverbs refers to events, then our ontology should include events [Sider]
|
|
p.144
|
7771
|
We need 'events' to explain adverbs, which are adjectival predicates of events [Lycan]
|
§8
|
p.208
|
8860
|
Language-learning is not good enough evidence for the existence of events [Yablo]
|
|
p.82
|
6179
|
Should we assume translation to define truth, or the other way around? [Blackburn]
|
|
p.142
|
7769
|
You can state truth-conditions for "I am sick now" by relativising it to a speaker at a time [Lycan]
|
|
p.146
|
7772
|
Compositionality explains how long sentences work, and truth conditions are the main compositional feature [Lycan]
|
|
p.246
|
7327
|
Davidson thinks Frege lacks an account of how words create sentence-meaning [Miller,A]
|
p.35
|
p.35
|
7332
|
There is a huge range of sentences of which we do not know the logical form
|
1969
|
The Individuation of Events
|
|
p.38
|
18914
|
Davidson controversially proposed to quantify over events [Engelbretsen]
|
|
p.113
|
9843
|
You can't identify events by causes and effects, as the event needs to be known first [Dummett]
|
|
p.163
|
8278
|
The claim that events are individuated by their causal relations to other events is circular [Lowe]
|
3
|
p.87
|
14602
|
Events can only be individuated causally [Schaffer,J]
|
Intro IIb
|
p.7
|
14004
|
We need events for action statements, causal statements, explanation, mind-and-body, and adverbs [Bourne]
|
|
p.2
|
8188
|
Davidson takes truth to attach to individual sentences [Dummett]
|
|
p.5
|
2307
|
Anomalous monism says nothing at all about the relationship between mental and physical [Kim]
|
|
p.8
|
5497
|
Mind is outside science, because it is humanistic and partly normative [Lycan]
|
|
p.33
|
6620
|
Davidson sees identity as between events, not states, since they are related in causation [Lowe]
|
|
p.62
|
4081
|
Anomalous monism says causes are events, so the mental and physical are identical, without identical properties [Crane]
|
|
p.92
|
2321
|
If rule-following and reason are 'anomalies', does that make reductionism impossible? [Kim]
|
|
p.137
|
3404
|
Davidson claims that mental must be physical, to make mental causation possible [Kim]
|
|
p.138
|
3405
|
If mental causation is lawless, it is only possible if mental events have physical properties [Kim]
|
|
p.196
|
3524
|
Causation is either between events, or between descriptions of events [Maslin]
|
|
p.198
|
3526
|
Whether an event is a causal explanation depends on how it is described [Maslin]
|
|
p.202
|
3529
|
Reduction is impossible because mind is holistic and brain isn't [Maslin]
|
|
p.218
|
3429
|
Multiple realisability was worse news for physicalism than anomalous monism was [Kim]
|
I
|
p.214
|
16041
|
Supervenience of the mental means physical changes mental, and mental changes physical
|
p.217
|
p.217
|
4983
|
There are no rules linking thought and behaviour, because endless other thoughts intervene
|
1970
|
Semantics for Natural Languages
|
|
p.45
|
15160
|
Davidson rejected ordinary meaning, and just used truth and reference instead [Soames]
|
2
|
p.229
|
14612
|
Davidson aimed to show that language is structured by first-order logic [Smart]
|
1973
|
In Defence of Convention T
|
|
p.276
|
7331
|
A theory of meaning comes down to translating sentences into Fregean symbolic logic [Macey]
|
|
p.112
|
19698
|
Deviant causal chain: a reason causes an action, but isn't the reason for which it was performed [Neta]
|
p.259
|
p.259
|
6386
|
In no important way can psychology be reduced to the physical sciences
|
1974
|
The Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme
|
p.11
|
p.39
|
19044
|
Saying truths fit experience adds nothing to truth; nothing makes sentences true
|
p.184
|
p.184
|
6398
|
Different points of view make sense, but they must be plotted on a common background
|
p.184
|
p.184
|
6399
|
Criteria of translation give us the identity of conceptual schemes
|
p.189
|
p.189
|
6400
|
Without the dualism of scheme and content, not much is left of empiricism
|
p.14
|
p.14
|
6394
|
The pattern of sentences held true gives sentences their meaning
|
p.17
|
p.17
|
6395
|
An understood sentence can be used for almost anything; it isn't language if it has only one use
|
p.170
|
p.170
|
11144
|
Concepts are only possible in a language community
|
p.170
|
p.170
|
11145
|
Having a belief involves the possibility of being mistaken
|
p.20
|
p.20
|
6396
|
A sentence is held true because of a combination of meaning and belief
|
p.22
|
p.22
|
6397
|
The concept of belief can only derive from relationship to a speech community
|
p.8
|
p.8
|
6392
|
Thought depends on speech
|
p.9
|
p.9
|
6393
|
A creature doesn't think unless it interprets another's speech
|
1977
|
The Method of Truth in Metaphysics
|
§II
|
p.295
|
4041
|
Sentences held true determine the meanings of the words they contain
|
§III
|
p.303
|
4042
|
Metaphysics requires the idea of people (speakers) located in space and time
|
1977
|
Reality without Reference
|
p.132
|
p.132
|
6387
|
A minimum requirement for a theory of meaning is that it include an account of truth
|
p.134
|
p.134
|
6388
|
Is reference the key place where language and the world meet?
|
p.135
|
p.135
|
6389
|
To explain the reference of a name, you must explain its sentence-role, so reference can't be defined nonlinguistically
|
p.136
|
p.136
|
6390
|
With a holistic approach, we can give up reference in empirical theories of language
|
p.137
|
p.137
|
6391
|
A theory of truth tells us how communication by language is possible
|
|
p.8
|
20024
|
Davidson gave up reductive accounts of intention, and said it was a primitive [Wilson/Schpall]
|
p.99
|
p.120
|
20076
|
An intending is a judgement that the action is desirable
|
p.29
|
p.29
|
7775
|
Understanding a metaphor is a creative act, with no rules
|
p.30
|
p.30
|
7776
|
Metaphors just mean what their words literally mean
|
p.40
|
p.40
|
7777
|
We accept a metaphor when we see the sentence is false
|
1980
|
Intro to 'Essays on Actions and Events'
|
p.xi
|
p.-6
|
6383
|
Cause unites our picture of the universe; without it, mental and physical will separate
|
p.xi
|
p.-6
|
6384
|
The notion of cause is essential to acting for reasons, intentions, agency, akrasia, and free will
|
p.xii
|
p.-5
|
6385
|
The causally strongest reason may not be the reason the actor judges to be best
|
1983
|
Coherence Theory of Truth and Knowledge
|
|
p.3
|
19081
|
Coherence with a set of propositions suggests we can know the proposition corresponds [Donnellan]
|
|
p.34
|
8255
|
Davidson says the world influences us causally; I say it influences us rationally [McDowell]
|
16.6
|
p.171
|
18703
|
Davidson's Cogito: 'I think, therefore I am generally right' [Button]
|
I.6
|
p.14
|
8252
|
Davidson believes experience is non-conceptual, and outside the space of reasons [McDowell]
|
p.156
|
p.156
|
8801
|
Coherent justification says only beliefs can be reasons for holding other beliefs
|
p.157
|
p.157
|
8802
|
Sensations lack the content to be logical; they cause beliefs, but they cannot justify them
|
p.158
|
p.158
|
8804
|
Reasons for beliefs are not the same as evidence
|
p.161
|
p.161
|
8805
|
Skepticism is false because our utterances agree, because they are caused by the same objects
|
p.162
|
p.162
|
8806
|
The concepts of belief and truth are linked, since beliefs are meant to fit reality
|
1987
|
Knowing One's Own Mind
|
|
p.144
|
6175
|
External identification doesn't mean external location, as with sunburn [Rowlands]
|
1987
|
Problems in the Explanation of Action
|
|
p.120
|
20074
|
We can keep Davidson's account of intentions in action, by further explaining prior intentions [Stout,R]
|
1990
|
Epistemology Externalized
|
p.197
|
p.197
|
8872
|
It is widely supposed that externalism cannot be reconciled with first-person authority
|
p.198
|
p.198
|
8873
|
The cause of a usage determines meaning, but why is the microstructure of water relevant?
|
p.199
|
p.199
|
8874
|
It is hard to interpret a speaker's actions if we take a broad view of the content
|
1990
|
The Structure and Content of Truth
|
p.304
|
p.23
|
18902
|
Correspondence theories can't tell you what truths correspond to
|
1991
|
Three Varieties of Knowledge
|
|
p.124
|
10346
|
Knowing other minds rests on knowing both one's own mind and the external world [Dummett]
|
|
p.127
|
10347
|
Objectivity is intersubjectivity
|
p.207
|
p.207
|
8866
|
If we know other minds through behaviour, but not our own, we should assume they aren't like me
|
p.209
|
p.209
|
8867
|
A belief requires understanding the distinctions of true-and-false, and appearance-and-reality
|
p.209
|
p.209
|
8868
|
Objective truth arises from interpersonal communication
|
p.211
|
p.211
|
8869
|
The principle of charity attributes largely consistent logic and largely true beliefs to speakers
|
p.213
|
p.213
|
8870
|
Content of thought is established through communication, so knowledge needs other minds
|
p.231
|
p.231
|
3964
|
If the mind is an anomaly, this makes reduction of the mental to the physical impossible
|
p.231
|
p.231
|
3965
|
Mental entities do not add to the physical furniture of the world
|
p.231
|
p.231
|
3966
|
The correct conclusion is ontological monism combined with conceptual dualism
|
p.231
|
p.231
|
3963
|
There are no strict psychophysical laws connecting mental and physical events
|
p.231
|
p.231
|
3962
|
Cause and effect relations between events must follow strict laws
|
p.231
|
p.231
|
3960
|
There are no such things as minds, but people have mental properties
|
p.231
|
p.231
|
3961
|
Obviously all mental events are causally related to physical events
|
p.232
|
p.232
|
3969
|
There are no ultimate standards of rationality, since we only assess others by our own standard
|
p.232
|
p.232
|
3967
|
Absence of all rationality would be absence of thought
|
p.232
|
p.232
|
3968
|
Propositions explain nothing without an explanation of how sentences manage to name them
|
p.233
|
p.233
|
3971
|
There is simply no alternative to the 'principle of charity' in interpreting what others do
|
p.233
|
p.233
|
3970
|
Thought is only fully developed if we communicate with others
|
p.233
|
p.233
|
3972
|
Truth and objectivity depend on a community of speakers to interpret what they mean
|
p.234
|
p.234
|
3973
|
Without a teacher, the concept of 'getting things right or wrong' is meaningless
|
p.235
|
p.235
|
3974
|
Our meanings are partly fixed by events of which we may be ignorant
|
p.10
|
p.10
|
23287
|
Disquotation only accounts for truth if the metalanguage contains the object language
|
P.11
|
p.11
|
23288
|
When Tarski defines truth for different languages, how do we know it is a single concept?
|
p.13
|
p.13
|
23289
|
Knowing the potential truth conditions of a sentence is necessary and sufficient for understanding
|
p.13
|
p.13
|
23290
|
It could be that the use of a sentence is explained by its truth conditions
|
p.16
|
p.16
|
23292
|
Correspondence can't be defined, but it shows how truth depends on the world
|
p.16
|
p.16
|
23291
|
Without truth, both language and thought are impossible
|
p.3
|
p.3
|
23284
|
Plato's Forms confused truth with the most eminent truths, so only Truth itself is completely true
|
p.5
|
p.5
|
23285
|
If we try to identify facts precisely, they all melt into one (as the Slingshot Argument proves)
|
P.6
|
p.6
|
23286
|
Truth can't be a goal, because we can neither recognise it nor confim it
|
p.323
|
p.323
|
18702
|
Names, descriptions and predicates refer to things; without that, language and thought are baffling
|
1999
|
The Folly of Trying to Define Truth
|
p.20
|
p.20
|
23294
|
It is common to doubt truth when discussing it, but totally accept it when discussing knowledge
|
p.21
|
p.21
|
23296
|
We can elucidate indefinable truth, but showing its relation to other concepts
|
p.21
|
p.21
|
23295
|
Truth cannot be reduced to anything simpler
|
p.23
|
p.23
|
23297
|
The language to define truth needs a finite vocabulary, to make the definition finite
|
p.25
|
p.25
|
23298
|
Neither Aristotle nor Tarski introduce the facts needed for a correspondence theory
|
2005
|
Truth and Predication
|
Intro
|
p.1
|
19131
|
We recognise sentences at once as linguistic units; we then figure out their parts
|
Intro
|
p.2
|
19132
|
Top-down semantic analysis must begin with truth, as it is obvious, and explains linguistic usage
|
Intro
|
p.4
|
19133
|
If you assign semantics to sentence parts, the sentence fails to compose a whole
|
1
|
p.17
|
19136
|
Many say that Tarski's definitions fail to connect truth to meaning
|
1
|
p.27
|
19139
|
Tarski does not tell us what his various truth predicates have in common
|
2
|
p.30
|
19140
|
'Satisfaction' is a generalised form of reference
|
2
|
p.32
|
19142
|
Probability can be constrained by axioms, but that leaves open its truth nature
|
2
|
p.33
|
19144
|
'Epistemic' truth depends what rational creatures can verify
|
2
|
p.34
|
19146
|
Satisfaction is a sort of reference, so maybe we can define truth in terms of reference?
|
2
|
p.34
|
19145
|
We can explain truth in terms of satisfaction - but also explain satisfaction in terms of truth
|
2
|
p.35
|
19147
|
Truth is the basic concept, because Convention-T is agreed to fix the truths of a language
|
2
|
p.39
|
19148
|
There is nothing interesting or instructive for truths to correspond to
|
2
|
p.41
|
19149
|
If we reject corresponding 'facts', we should also give up the linked idea of 'representations'
|
2
|
p.43
|
19150
|
Coherence truth says a consistent set of sentences is true - which ties truth to belief
|
2
|
p.48
|
19151
|
Antirealism about truth prevents its use as an intersubjective standard
|
3
|
p.50
|
19152
|
Utterances have the truth conditions intended by the speaker
|
3
|
p.55
|
19153
|
Truth is basic and clear, so don't try to replace it with something simpler
|
3
|
p.62
|
19154
|
The principle of charity says an interpreter must assume the logical constants
|
4
|
p.96
|
19156
|
Modern predicates have 'places', and are sentences with singular terms deleted from the places
|
5
|
p.102
|
19158
|
'Humanity belongs to Socrates' is about humanity, so it's a different proposition from 'Socrates is human'
|
6
|
p.121
|
19160
|
A comprehensive theory of truth probably includes a theory of predication
|
6
|
p.123
|
19161
|
We indicate use of a metaphor by its obvious falseness, or trivial truth
|
6
|
p.123
|
19162
|
Meaning involves use, but a sentence has many uses, while meaning stays fixed
|
6
|
p.124
|
19163
|
You only understand an order if you know what it is to obey it
|
6
|
p.128
|
19167
|
Two sentences can be rephrased by equivalent substitutions to correspond to the same thing
|
6
|
p.128
|
19166
|
The Slingshot assumes substitutions give logical equivalence, and thus identical correspondence
|
7
|
p.145
|
19169
|
Predicates are a source of generality in sentences
|
7
|
p.150
|
19170
|
Tarski is not a disquotationalist, because you can assign truth to a sentence you can't quote
|
7
|
p.153
|
19172
|
To define a class of true sentences is to stipulate a possible language
|
7
|
p.158
|
19173
|
Treating predicates as sets drops the predicate for a new predicate 'is a member of', which is no help
|
7
|
p.160
|
19174
|
Axioms spell out sentence satisfaction. With no free variables, all sequences satisfy the truths
|
7
|
p.161
|
19176
|
The concept of truth can explain predication
|