Evans, transparency, and Cartesianism

European Journal of Philosophy 28 (3):685-702 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In The Varieties of Reference, Evans makes two parallel claims about thought and perception. He argues that both our capacity to self-ascribe thought and our capacity to self-ascribe perception are fallible. The essay focuses on his claim about perception and examines its relation to Evans's project of rejecting a Cartesian conception of the mind. In his theory of perception, I argue, Evans embraces a conception of first-person authority that he seeks to reject in his account of thought. He is thus not able to extend to perception the critique of Cartesianism that he develops in the context of his analysis of thought. My intent is not exclusively critical. By working through the difficulties that Evans's argument raises, I seek to shed light on whether and, if so, how criticisms of a Cartesian conception of thought may be extended to the philosophy of perception.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-01-30

Downloads
122 (#379,786)

6 months
35 (#252,376)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Zapero
University of Bonn

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The intrinsic quality of experience.Gilbert Harman - 1990 - Philosophical Perspectives 4:31-52.
Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius.Ray Monk - 1990 - New York: Penguin Books.
The transparency of experience.Michael G. F. Martin - 2002 - Mind and Language 17 (4):376-425.
The Varieties of Reference.Gareth Evans & John Mcdowell - 1986 - Philosophy 61 (238):534-538.
Consciousness and Experience.William G. Lycan - 1996 - Philosophy 72 (282):602-604.

View all 34 references / Add more references