a naturalistic perspective on intentionality - interview with dd

8/7/2019 A Naturalistic Perspective on Intentionality - Interview With DD

1/12

M ind & Society, 6, 2002, V ol. 3, pp. 1-129 2002, Ro senb erg & Sellier, Fon dazion e Ro sselli

A natural is t ic perspect ive on intent ional i ty .I n t e rv i e w w i t h D a n i e l D e n n e t t

b y M a r c o M i ro l li

Marco Mirolli Y o u d e s c r i b e y o u r s e l f a s a p h i l o so p h e r o f m i n d a n d y o u r e j e c t th ee x h o r t a t io n s t o g e t m o r e i n v o l v e d i n th e a b s t ra c t p r o b l e m s o f o n t o l o g y a n d o fp h i l o s o p h y o f s c i e n c e i n g e ne r al , e v e n i f th e p r o b l e m s o f t h e p h i l o s o p h y o f m i n da n d t h o s e o f p h i l o s o p h y o f s c i e n c e a r e d e e p l y m u t u a l l y d e p e n d e n t . I t h i n k t hi s i sa n i m p o r t a n t i s s u e b e c a u se , w h i le y o u s a y t h at y o u r p h i l o s o p h y p r e s u p p o s e s o n l yt h e s t a n d a r d s c i e n ti f ic o n t o l o g y a n d e p i s t e m o l o g y 1, i t s e e m s t o m e t h a t w h a t y o ur e a ll y p r e s u p p o s e i s r a th e r a Q u i n e a n v i e w o f o n t o l o g y a n d e p i s t e m o l o g y , w h i c hi s n o t s o s t a n d ar d , e v e n i f it m a y w e l l b e t h e o n e w e s h o u l d a c c e p t .

Daniel Dennett W e l l , m a y b e s o , l e t ' s s e e . C e r t a i n l y I h a v e s e e n a l m o s t n o r e a s o nt o a d o p t a n y o t h e r o n t o l o g y t h a n Q u i n e ' s ; a n d w h e n I l o o k a t t h e w o r k i n t h e p h i -l o s o p h y o f s c i e n c e a n d m o r e p a r t i c u la r l y a t t h e w o r k i n s c i e n c e , I d o n o t f i n d a n yg r o u n d y e t f o r a b a n d o n i n g a Q u i n e a n v i e w o f o n t o l o g y f o r s o m e t h i n g f a n c ie r . Itc o u l d h a p p e n , b u t I h a v e n ' t s e e n a n y r e a s o n f o r d o i n g t h is ; s o i f y o u w a n t t o s a yt h a t I am v u l n e rab l e o n t h i s , t h a t ' s r e a l l y t ru e . I h av e s t a t ed t h a t I d o n ' t s ee an yo f th e c o m p l e x i t i e s o f s c i e n c e o r p h i l o s o p h y o f m i n d r a i s in g o n t o l o g i c a l i s s u e st h a t a r e m o r e s o p h i s t i c a t e d t h a n t h o s e a Q u i n e a n o n t o l o g y c o u l d h a n d l e ; b u t Im a y b e w r o n g . Y o u m i g h t s h o w m e w h e r e I a m w r o n g .

M.M. N o , I a l s o t h i n k t h a t Q u i n e a n o n t o l o g y a n d e p i s t e m o l o g y a r e t h e o n e s w es h o u l d a c c e p t . T h e p o i n t I w a n t e d t o s t r e s s i s t h a t m u c h o f th e d i s c u s s i o n a b o u tt h e r ea l i s m o n i n t en t i o n a l en t i t i e s i s d u e n o t t o a s u b s t an t i a l d i s ag reem en t o ni n t en t i o n a l i t y i t s e lf , b u t r a t h e r t o o n t o l o g i ca l a s s u m p t i o n s . I m e an , fo r ex am p l e ,y o u r d i s c u s s i o n i n " R e a l P a t t e r n s ''2 a b o u t w h a t y o u c a l l e d ' m i l d r e a l i s m ' v e r s u s' s tr o n g r e a l i s m ' a n d s o o n .

D.D. W el l , i n "R ea l P a t t e rn s " I p r e s en t ed w h a t I th o u g h t t h e i s s u es we r e an d I s h o w edw h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e w a s b e t w e e n m y p o s i t i o n a n d D a v i d s o n ' s , a n d b e t w e e n m y

Daniel D eimett: Cen ter for Co gnitive Studies, Tufts University, M edford, MA, US AM arco M irolli: Dipartimento di Filosofia e Scienz e Sociali, Un iversita di Siena1Cf. D ennett, 1991a; 1993.2 Dennett, 1991a.


2/12

Mind & Society, 6, 2002, Vol. 3

position and Churchland's. It's ten years since that piece came out and in those tenyears I have not been shown any compelling reason to change my view on whatthe ontological issues are. Neither Davidson himself nor even the Davidsonianshave shown - or even tried to show - that his position can handle problems that Ican't. I mean: maybe they are not interested, maybe they see there is nothing muchto divide us there. With Churchland it's only a matter of emphasis, I think.

M.M.: And what about Ruth Millikan? You tend to minimize the differencesbetween Ruth Millikan' s account of intentionality and yours, but I think there isan important difference between the two. Both of you give a teleological accountof functions, but it seems to me that while Millikan uses the notion of 'beingselected for' to identify functions, you think that an appeal to selection (eithernatural or artificial) is to be used on ly in the explanation of the existence of whatcan be viewed as functions. The difference, if real, is quite important, because itbrings Millikan to an essentialist notion of functions and so to a strong realismabout intentional entities. On the other hand, you treat attributions of functionsand intentional states as holis tically relative to the observer and this leads you toa milder kind of realism. What do you think about this explanation of the differ-ences between your position and Millikan's?

D.D. She thinks she can be more. ., you say essentialist about function. Well, yes:in a way, I think you are right. I think that is the disagreement that we have.

M.M. Let us go back to eliminativism: can you explain better why you think thatbetween you and Churchland there is only a difference in emphasis?

D.D. In the introduction to Brainstorms 3 I gave the example of fatigues. Imaginethat we find people that when they are tired they say "We have so many fatigues".So those people think there are these things: fatigues. That is, their ontologyincludes fatigues. So, what about when they come to us and ask: "What are thesefatigues?". Now, they are making a mistake, but what mistake are they making?The eliminativis t - the Paul Churchland - says: "Oh, fatigues do not exist. Weeliminated those things a long time ago. Go away, you are stupid. A certain sortof identity theorist went to tremendous lengths to identify fatigues and took onthe task of trying to come up with a definition which could be proof against allkinds of counterexample and so forth. And that's a hopeless endeavour".

Now what I would prefer to do is saying: "Well, look: your way of speaking isnot really very perspicacious here. In one sense there are no such things asfatigues, but I can help you. See: there is a sort of sense in which there are. If youwant to go on talking about fatigues, go ahead, but don' t demand the sort of reduc-tion that the identity theorist are trying to give". Now, in a way this has been mymessage all through my career. In Content and Consciousness 4 1 gave the exam-

3 Dennett, 1978.4 Dennett, 1969.


3/12

D enn ett & Mirolli - A naturalistic p ers pec tive on intentionality

p i e o f ' v o i c e s ' . I s ai d: " L o o k , i t w o u l d b e i n s a n e t o b e a n i d e n ti t y th e o r i s t a b o u tv o i c e s . I t w o u l d a l s o b e i n sa n e t o b e e l i m i n a t iv i s t a b o u t v o i c e s . J u s t g e t u s e d t ot h e f ac t t h a t t h e wo rd ' v o i ce ' p l ay s a ce r t a i n ro l e a t a ce r t a i n l ev e l i n t h e way wes p e a k , a n d t h e re i s n o th i n g m y s t e r i o u s a b o u t v o i c e s " . I t s e e m s t o m e t h a t w e h a v et w o a r ti fi c ia l p r o b l e m s , p r o b l e m s t h a t a re o n l y p u z z l e s f o r p h il o s o p h e r s w h o h a v et o o m u c h t i m e t o w a s t e . O n e o f t h e m i s t o g i v e a c o u n t e r e x a m p l e - p r o o f d e fi n it i ono f v o i ce i n t e rm s o f t h e i d en t i t y th eo ry , an d t h e o t h e r i s t o g i v e a co u n t e re x am -p i e - p r o o f o f e l im i n a t i vi s m : y o u k n o w , s h o w i n g h o w t o m a k e a ll y o u r b u s i n e s swi t h o u t ev e r r e f e r r i n g t o v o i ce s . I t ' s v e ry u s e fu l t o r e f e r t o v o i ce s . I wo u l d n ' ta d v o c a t e n o t r ef e r ri n g t o v o i c e s . S o m y o n t o l o g i c a l s c r u p le s : i n a w a y I k n o w t hi si s v e r y fr u s tr a ti n g t o m a n y p h i l o s o p h e r s b e c a u s e I a m j u s t n o t p la y i n g t h i s k i n d o fo n t o l o g y ; I am j u s t s ay i n g t h i s i s n o t a b a l l -g am e t h a t I wan t t o p l ay , an d I d o n ' tt h i n k t h e re i s a r ea s o n t o p l ay i t . I t h i n k i n t h e ca s e o f v o i ce s i t ' s o b v i o u s . T h e rei s n o d e e p p u z z l e m e n t a b o u t v o i c e s . I f th e r e w e r e i n te r a c ti o n is t v o i c e - d u a l i s ts ,t h e n w e w o u l d h a v e t o s t a r t t h e g a m e m u c h m o r e s e r i o u s l y o n t h e o n t o l o g y , f o ri n st a nc e . B u t i n f a c t p e o p l e j u s t g e t it: t h e y s e e t h e r e i s n o p r o b l e m h e r e. N o w i nt h e ca s e o f m en t a l en t i t i e s in g en e ra l i t ' s m u ch m o re p u zz l i n g , b u t I t h i n k t h a t isl i k e a l l o f t h e s c i en t i f i c p u zz l e s : t h e s c i en t if i c p u zz l e s a r e s e r i o u s l y i n fe c t ed w i t ht h e co n fu s i o n s t h a t a r i s e i n o rd i n a ry l an g u ag e . I t h i n k t h a t a f t e r a l l t h e s c i en t i s t sg e t th e i r p u z z l e m e n t f r o m e v e r y d a y t h in k i n g a n d t a lk i n g j u s t t h e w a y m o s t o f u sd o ; a n d t h e s e p u z z l e s a r i se w h e n t h e y t ry t o m a p f o l k p s y c h o l o g y o n t o s c i e n c e .B u t wh a t I wan t t o s ay i s t h a t t h ey s h o u l d m a i n t a i n t h a t l o o s e p rag m a t i c a t t it u d et h a t t h ey m a i n t a i n w i t h r eg a rd t o v o i ce s t o m en t a l en t i ti e s t o o . T h a t i s , t h ey s h o u l dn o t t h i n k t h a t t h e o n l y p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n s t o t h e s e p ro b l em s l i e w i t h t h e i d en t i t yt h eo r i s t an d e l i m i n a t i v i s t o r t h e d u a l i s t . T h ey r e j ec t ed t h a t t r i o fo r v o i ce s an d fo rf a t i g u es an d t h ey s h o u l d r e j ec t t h a t tr i o fo r q u a l i a an d b e l i e f s t o o .

M.M. O k a y ; b u t s o m e t i m e y o u s a y y o u a r e a re a li s t a b o u t b el ie f s , s o s o m e t i m e y o ua c c e p t t o p l a y t h e g a m e , a n d p l a y i n g t h i s g a m e f r o m a Q u i n e a n p o i n t o f v i e w , a si t i s y o u r s , m ean s t o s ay : "A s f a r a s we n ee d t o ad o p t t h e i n t en t i o n a l s t an ce i n th ec o g n i t i v e s c i e n c e s , w e c a n a n d m u s t b e r e a l i s ts a b o u t b e l i e f s " . B u t i f t h is i s tr u e ,t h e re i s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e i n t en t i o n a l s t an ce wo u l d n o l o n g e r b e a s c i en t i f i co n e . Ac t u a l l y , i t s eem s t o m e t h a t t h i s i s n o t a s c i en ce - f i c t i o n a l h y p o t h es i s ,b e c a u s e t h e r e a r e a lr e a d y s o m e s c i e n ti s ts w h o t h in k , f o r e x a m p l e , t h a t th e b e s tw a y o f l o o k in g a t h u m a n b e h a v i o r i s f r o m a d y n a m i c a l - s y s t e m p o i n t o f vi ew . I nt h a t c a s e , t h e r e w o u l d b e n o m o r e s p a c e f o r th e i n t e n ti o n a l s t a n c e w i t h i n s c i e n c e .

D.D.: Y e s , g o o d . S o w e d o h a v e s o m e s e r i o u s s c ie n t is t s a n d p h i lo s o p h e r s w h o t h i n kt h a t e l i m i n a t i v i s m i s a r ea l an d s t ro n g p o s s i b i l i t y . I t h i n k t h a t ' s an ex ce l l en ta v e n u e d o w n w h i c h a c h a l l e n g e m i g h t c o m e : I w a n t t o s e e i t . T h e r o a d e x i s t s : i ft h e re i s an y t h i n g t r av e l l i n g o n i t , t h a t i s wh a t I d o n ' t k n o w. T i m Van Ge l d e r , fo ri n s ta n c e , i s a n A u s t r a l i a n p h i l o s o p h e r w h o i n t h e S t a t es p u s h e d t h i s i d e a v e r yh a r d a f e w y e a r s a g o . H e w a s a d v o c a t i n g t h a t w h e n w e s w i t c h t o t h e d y n a m i -c a l - s y s t e m a p p r o a c h , t h i s w i l l r e v o l u t i o n i z e c o g n i t i v e s c i e n c e s : n o m o r e i n f o r -m a t i o n - p r o c e s s i n g ; w e a r e a l l c o m p l e x d y n a m i c a l s y s t e m s . H e s h o w e d o n e o r


4/12

M ind & Society, 6, 2002, Vol. 3

t w o e x a m p l e s o f p h e n o m e n a t h a t o n e m i g h t s u p p o s e n e e d e d a c o g n i ti v is t ice x p l a n a t i o n a n d h e g a v e w h a t o n e m i g h t a c c e p t w a s a n o n - c o g n i t i v e d y n a m i -c a l - s y s t e m s e x p la n a t i o n . T h i s w a s li k e S k i n n e r s a y i n g : " T o d a y th e p i g e o n ,t o m o r r o w c h e s s ! " W e l l , y e s : t h e r e i s s o m e t h i n g y o u c a n t r a i n t h e p i g e o n t o d ot h a t y o u d o n ' t n e e d a c o g n i t i v e s c i e n c e t o e x p l ai n . T h a t i s e n o u g h t o e s t a b li s h th ep o s s i b i l i t y t h a t w e m i g h t h a v e a n o n - i n t e n t i o n a l s c i e n c e o f h u m a n b e i n g s - l e t 'sn o t s a y a s c i e n c e o f t h e m i n d b e c a u s e i f i t i s r e a l l y n o n - m e n t a l , i f i t 's r e a l l yd y n a m i c a l -s y s t e m s , w e w o n ' t t a lk a b o u t th e m i n d , w e w o n ' t ta l k a b o u t i n fo r m a -t i o n . B u t t h e f a c t r e m a i n s t h a t w e h a v e h u g e , u n c o n t r o v e r s i a l r e p o s i t o r i e s o fr o b u s t p r e d i c t i v e f a c ts i n t e r m s o f i n f o r m a t i o n . ..

L e t ' s s p e a k a b o u t v is io n : i f t h e d y n a m i c a l - s y s t e m s a p p r o a c h t o v i si o n i s t oe s t a b l i s h i t s e l f , w e w o n ' t t a l k a b o u t v i s i o n , w e ' l l j u s t t a l k a b o u t e y e s ; w e ' l l t a l ka b o u t th e c o m p l e x , d y n a m i c a l i n te r r el a ti o n s h ip s b e t w e e n t h e e y e s a n d t h e r e s t o ft h e w o r ld . I c h a ll e n g e a n y b o d y i n d y n a m i c a l - s y s t e m s t h e o r y t o m a k e a n y p r e d ic -t io n a t a ll u s in g t h e d y n a m i c a l - s y s t e m s t h e o r y t h a t w i l l c o v e r a n y o f t h e f a c ts t h a ta r e i n c o n t r o v e r t i b l y k n o w n a b o u t v is io n . T h e y c o u l d t ry , b u t t h e y h a v e n ' t d o n e i ty e t . I m e a n : a s s o o n a s y o u g e t a w a y f r o m s i m p l e t h in g s l i k e t h e c o n t r o l o f th el i m b s a n d f o l l o w i n g a w a l l b y t o u c h i n g i t a n d a f e w o t h e r v e r y s i m p l e t h i n g s , i ts e e m s t o m e t h at th e d y n a m i c a l - sy s t e m s p e o p l e ju s t e n d u p w i t h n o t v e r y m u c hs c i e n c e a t a ll! N o w , I w a n t to m a k e a n o t h e r e x a m p l e . S u p p o s e a p h y s i c i s t c o m e su p , n o t a c o m p l e x d y n a m i c a l - s y s t e m s p h y s i c is t , b u t j u s t a n o l d - f a s h i o n e d p h y s i -c is t, a n d s a y s : " L o o k , b a s i c a l ly w h a t y o u h a v e g o t h e r e i s a b u n c h o f p h o t o n s , y o uh a v e g o t a b u n c h o f a t o m s , s o l e t 's d o i t al l i n te r m s o f p h o t o n s a n d a t o m s , a n dl e t 's c u t o u t a l l t h a t v i si o n s t u f f ' . Y o u s a y : " W a i t a m i n u t e , y o u m e a n d e p t h p e r -c e p t i o n ? A r e w e n o t g o i n g t o t a lk a b o u t d e p t h p e r c e p t i o n ? . . .. R i g h t! N o n e e d t ot a lk a b o u t d e p t h p e r c e p t io n ; I c a n s i m p l y t a k e e v e r y c a s e o f w h a t y o u c a l l ' d e p t hp e r c e p t i o n ' a n d I c a n a n a l y s e i t i n t e r m s o f p h o t o n s a n d t h e m o t i o n s o f th e a t o m st h a t m a k e u p t h e b o d y . " W e l l, in a c e r ta i n s e n s e w e k n o w t h a t in p r i n c ip l e h e i sr igh t ; a n d he m i gh t a s w e l l , w h i l s t he i s at i t, i nc l ude t he s t o c k ma rk e t a nd j u s t ha n -d l e t ha t i n te rm s o f pa r t i c le s . A f t e r a l l i t' s j u s t m a d e o f ma t t er . B u t t he f a c t is tha ts c i e nc e s ha v e r e gu l a r i t ie s a t t he s e h i ghe r l e ve l s a nd s o t he r e gu l a r i t ie s o f t he s oc i a ls c i e n c e s s e e m t o m e t o b e u n c o n t r o v e r s i a l, p r e c i s e l y i n th e s e n s e t h a t y o u g e t r ea lp a t te r n s. T h a t i s , y o u c o u l d g e t r i c h b e t t in g o n i t i f o n l y y o u c o u l d g e t a n y b o d ys t u p id e n o u g h t o ta k e y o u r b e t . T h e r e a r e h u g e r e d u n d a n c i e s i n n a t u r e t h a t a red e s c r i b a b l e f r o m t h e in t e n ti o n a l s t a n c e a n d f r o m n o o t h e r s t a n ce .

M.M. T h e p o i n t I w a n t e d t o s t r e ss i s t h a t a n y w a y y o u n e e d a c ri te r i o n f o r o n t o l o g yi n o r d e r t o d i s t in g u i s h g o o d a b s t r a c t o b j e c t s - t h a t is s c i e n t if i c a b s t r a c t o b j e c t s -f r o m b a d a b s tr a c t o b j e c ts li k e ' D e n n e t t ' s L o s t s o c k s c ir c l e ', a s y o u y o u r s e l f s a yin "R ea l Pa t t e rns ''5 . Th i s i s the po in t a t is sue , I th ink , fo r i t i s th is c r i t e r ion tha tw e n e e d i n o r d e r t o b e a b l e t o a s se r t w h e t h e r i n t e n t i o n a l o b j e c t s a r e r e a l o b j e c t so r n o t. A n d i t s e e m s t o m e t h a t y o u , f o l l o w i n g Q u i n e , t a k e t h i s c r i te r i o n t o b e t h eu s e f u l n e s s i n a s c i e n t if i c th e o r y . T h i s w a s t h e r e a s o n f o r m e t o i n t ro d u c e d y n a m -

5 Dennett, 1991a.


5/12

De nne tt & M iroll i - A naturalist ic persp ective on intentionality

i c a l - s y s t e m s t h e o ri s ts : i f t h e y w e r e r i g ht , t h e n y o u w o u l d h a v e t o s a y t h a t t h e r ea re no t h i ngs s uc h a s be l i e f s .

D . D . Y e s , i f t h e y w e r e r ig h t! I f t h e y w e r e a b l e , u s i n g th e i r d y n a m i c a l - s y s t e m s p e r -s p e c t i v e , t o p r e d i c t a l l t h e p a t t e r n s t h a t w e r e p r e d i c t e d f r o m m y i n t e n t io n a l s t a n c ea n d t h e n m o r e ; a n d c o u l d a l s o p r e d i c t th e f a il u re s o f m y p a t te r n . R e m e m b e r , f o rt h e m t o h a v e a g o o d p a t t e r n o r a b e t t e r p a t t e r n - o n e s o th a t w e s h o u l d a b a n d o no u r p a t t e rn a n d g o t o th e i r p a t t e r n - i t 's n o t e n o u g h t h a t w e k n o w t h a t i n p r i n c i-p l e i f w e g a v e t h e m e t e m i t y a n d a f in e m i c r o s c o p e t h e y c o u l d d o i t. W e k n o wt h a t i n p r i n c i p l e y o u c o u l d p r e d i c t e v e r y t h i n g u s i n g t h e p h y s i c a l s t a n c e , b u t t h equ e s t i o n i s t ha t t he y a r e s t il l l e a v i n g o u t pa t t e rns , pa t t e rns t ha t c a n on l y bed e s c r i b e d f r o m t h e i n t e n t i o n a l s t a n c e . A n d m a y b e t h e y a r e g o i n g t o s a y : " A n dt h e re a r e a l s o p a tt e rn s t h at c o u l d o n l y b e d e s c r i b e d f r o m t h e d y n a m i c a l - s y s t e mp e r s p e c t i v e " . T h a t ' s a n i n t e r e s ti n g c l a im . L e t ' s s e e if i t i s t ru e . B u t u n t i l t h e y c a na l s o p r e d i c t t h e p a t t e r n s t h a t a r e p r e d i c t a b l e f r o m t h e i n t e n t i o n a l s t a n c e , t h e yh a v e n ' t g i v e n u s a n y r e a s o n t o e l i m i n a t e t h o s e a s g o o d e n t i t i e s .

M.M. B ut t he r e i s a no t he r pos s i b i l i t y , t ha t i s t he y c a n s a y t ha t t he pa t t e rns p r e d i c t -e d f r o m t h e i n te n t i o n a l s t a n c e a r e n o t p a t te r n s t h a t a r e w o r t h i n c l u d i n g i n s c i en c e .T h e p o i n t i s t h a t th e r e i s a n i n fi n i ty o f p a t t er n s , a n d s o m e a r e w o r t h e x p l a i n i n ga nd s ome a r e no t . A f t e r a l l , pa t t e rns a r e a ma t t e r t ha t i s r e l a t i ve t o a n obs e rve r .

D.D. U h m m . N o t re a l ly s o . T h i n k a b o u t th e e x a m p l e I g iv e i n " T w o b l a c k b o x e s ' 6 .T h a t ' s n o t a p a t t e r n t h a t i s r e l a ti v e t o a n o b s e r v e r a t al l. I m a d e u p t h e c a s e s o th a tt h e re i s a p u z z l in g c a u s a l r e g u l a ri ty b e t w e e n p u s h i n g a b u t to n o n o n e b o x a n d al i g h t g o i n g o n o n a n o t h e r b o x . T h a t ' s a p a t t e r n t h a t i s n o t o b s e r v e r - r e l a t i v e a n dt h a t c a n o n l y b e e x p l a i n e d f r o m t h e i n t e n t i o n a l s t a n c e ( b e c a u s e t h e c o n n e c t i o nb e t w e e n t h e b o x e s c a r ri e d in f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e w i d e r w o r l d believed b y t h ed e s i g n e rs o f t h e t w o b o x e s ) . T h i s w o u l d b e a n e x a m p l e I w o u l d p r e s e n t to t h ed y n a m i c a l - s y s t e m s p e o p l e s a y in g : " Y o u k n o w t hi s p h e n o m e n o n e x h i b it s th e fo l -l o w i n g d e e p r e g u l a r it y : w h e n e v e r y o u p r e s s b u t t o n A t h e r e d li g h t g o e s o n , a n dw h e n e v e r y o u p r e s s th e b u t t o n B t h e g r e e n l ig h t g o e s o n . N o w , p l e a s e e x p la i nt h is r e g u l a r i ty t o m e " . A n d I c l a i m t h e y c o u l d n o t e x p l a i n t h is r e g u l a r i ty w i t h o u tus i ng t he i n t e n t i ona l s t a nc e .

M.M. C a n y o u e x p l a i n b e t t e r y o u r p o s i ti o n r e g a r d in g t h e r e la t io n s h i p s b e t w e e n p a t -t e r n s a n d o n t o l o g y ?

D.D. O K , l e t 's s e e . W e h a v e g o t a l l t h e s e a t o m s , a n d t h e n w e h a v e t h e p a t t e rn s t h a tw e d i s c e r n a m o n g t h e s e a t o m s a n d f o u r d i m e n s i o n s : s p a c e a n d t i m e . N o w t h eq u e s t i o n i s : D o t h e p a t t e r n s h a v e o n t o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e ? A n d f o r m e t h ea n s w e r i s : T h a t ' s w h a t o n t o l o g y i s . W h a t o t h e r c r i t e r i o n c o u l d y o u e v e r u s e ?W h a t o t h e r r e a s o n c o u l d y o u e v e r h a v e f o r y o u r o n t o l o g i c a l p r e s u p p o s i t io n s ?

6 Dennett, 1991b; 1995.


6/12


If an economist came running into the university and he said: "I found a neweconomic force: the 'Third of April Uncle fo rce' ". And we say: "What?" Hesays: "On the third of April uncles play a very special role in economics". Wewould say: "Wow! That's amazing! Show me that this is a real pattern". Now, ifhe can show me it's a real pattern, then I'v e got a problem because he has a goodreason for saying there is a force, an up-to-now unimagined , unidentified force.If he can't show me that pattern, then he is just kidd ing himself, he is just fool-ish. That' s what ontology is about, I think. There are lots of economic patterns orpsychological patterns and we can also describe lots of non-patterns, like the'Third-of-April-Uncle' pattern, which I am sure doesn't exist. So I would say:any ontological point is to claim that there is a pattern. The reason that we are sosure that there is no 'Third-of -April-Uncle' force is that in spite of his efforts, inspite of his claims, he can never show anything happening which depends onwhat uncles do on the third of April. It turns out after severe examinat ion to be aphantasm; that he is just crazy; that there is nothing, that is, no-thing there, noreal pattern. So there is no ontology. If there was a real pattern, there would beontology.

I think this is a crucial issue, so let's take another example. An ontologistcomes in and says: "I found out there is a kind of thing that nobody has everimagined before". And we say: "What is it?" and he says: "It is a freebuz". Andwe say: "Wha t's a freebuz?" So we want to know what convinced him that therewas this thing. Now, if he says: "I have got one, I have one in my pocket. Hereit is!", then I know what he is talking about. Or he could say: "I postulated thisfreebuz force and now I can make sense of something that we could never makesense of before". And if he can do it, I will take the freebuz seriously just as if hehad taken it out of his pocket. But if he can't do anything like that then I thinkhe is just a mad man. I don't know w hy he is talking of ontology to me.

It's seems to me that onto logy is always grounded in our sense of there beinga regularity in our experience. This is my way o f being a 'phenomenalis t' with-out being a 'Phenomenali st'. There are two ways you could view a policy of thissort: you could view it as a proposal, as a normative recommendation for how weare to think; or you could view it as an observation about how in fact we havealways thought, how ontological issues have been treated in the past. And quitefrankly I am inclined to think that they are both true, that is to say: if we look atthe history of ontology, look at what sorts of things people have included in theirontology throughout history, we would see that - because they have thought theyhad these patterns - that lead them to the ontological convictions they had.

M.M. To accept the idea that the Quinean ontological criterion of existence mustbe relative to scientific theories, is to claim that we have to consider real, that isexistent, everything that is - and only that which is - used in our best scientifictheories of the world. So our theorizing seems to be, in a Kantian sense, the con-dition of possibility of ontology itself, and so o f existence in general. It seems tome that if we put the matter this way, we are able to expla in the special status thatmost people, and some philosophers as well, are inclined to give to our mind and


7/12

D enne tt & M irolli - A naturalistic persp ective on intentionality

i n te n t io n a l it y , b u t , a t t h e s a m e t i m e , w e a r e n o t c o m p e l l e d t o t h e n e g a t i o n o f t h ep o s s i b i l i t y o f ' s t r o n g A r t i f i c i a l I n t e l l i g e n c e ' a n d t o a l l t h e o t h e r o b s c u r a n t i s tv i e w s o n h u m a n b e i n g s . O n t h e o n e h a n d , w e c a n a d m i t a s p e c ia l s t at u s t o h u m a ni n t en t i o n a l i t y i n t h e s en s e t h a t i t ' s h u m an l an g u ag e t h a t g av e b i r t h t o s c i en ce an ds o th a t i s t h e c o n d i t i o n o f p o s s i b i l i t y o f e v e r y e x i s t e n c e , i n t h e o n l y s e n s e o f" e x i s t e n c e " t h a t i s w o r t h c o n s i d e r i n g . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , w e c a n d e n y t h e i n e f -f a b i l i ty a n d u n a c c o u n t a b i l i t y o f o u r i n t e n ti o n a li ty : n o t h i n g p r e v e n t s u s f r o m g i v -i n g a n e v o l u t i o n a r y e x p l a n a t io n f o r it. D o y o u t h i n k t h at t h is w a y o f t h in k i n g i ss o u n d o r i s i t s t i l l t o o m y s t i c fo r y o u ?

D.D. W h a t y o u s a y i s c l o s e t o w h a t J o h n H a u g e l a n d s a y s i n h is n e w b o o k , HavingThought, w h e r e h e h a s s o m e i n t e r es t in g l in e s o f t h is s o rt . A n d t h is a l s o r e m i n d sm e B r i a n S m i t h ' s b o o k On the O rigin o f Objects, e s p e c i a l l y w h e n y o u s a y : " i t ' sh u m a n l a n g u a g e t h a t g a v e b i r th t o s c i e n c e a n d s o t h a t is t h e c o n d i t io n o f p o s s i -b i l i ty o f e v e r y e x i s t e n c e , i n t h e o n l y s e n s e o f ' e x i s t e n c e ' t h a t i s w o r t h c o n s i d e r -i n g " . T h a t ' s n o t q u i t e w h a t I w o u l d s a y , b u t I t h i n k H a u g e l a n d w o u l d s a y t h a t .A c t u a l l y h e s a y s s o m e t h i n g d i f f e r e n t t o o . H e s a y s w e h a v e t o u n d e r s t a n d t h a t i ti s n o t s o m u c h l a n g u a g e a s t h e n o r m a t i v e n e s s o f h u m a n s o c i a l c u l t u r e w h i c h i st h e c o n d i t i o n o f p o s s i b i l i t y o f e v e r y e x i s t e n c e .

M.M. I t s e e m s t o m e t h a t y o u r t h e o r y o f i n te n t i o n a li ty s t r o n g l y d e p e n d s o n t h e t h e-s i s o f t h e n o rm a t i v i t y o f i n t en t i o n a l a t t r ib u t i o n s , t h a t i s t h e t h e s i s t h a t s u ch a t t ri -b u t i o n s p r e s u p p o s e t h e r a t i o n a l i ty o f t h e o b j e c t o f th e a t tr i b ut io n s . I n f a c t, i fH u m e w a s r i g h t , a n d I a s s u m e h e w a s , i n s a y i n g t h a t y o u c a n n e v e r g e t' o u g h t - s e n t e n c e s ' f r o m ' i s - s e n t e n c e s ' t h e n , i f i n t e n ti o n a l it y i s a n o r m a t i v e c o n -c e p t , i t c a n n o t b e a n e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e o f a s y s t e m , b u t i t m u s t b e r e l a t i v e t o a no b s e r v e r . A n d f r o m t h i s f a c t , h o l i s m a n d y o u r m i l d r e a l i s m f o l l o w q u i t e t a c i t l y .B u t w h a t a r e t h e r e a s o n s f o r b e l i e v i n g t h a t i n t e n t i o n a l a s c r i p t i o n s p r e s u p p o s er a t i o n a li t y ? A r e t h e y o n l y c o n s i d e r a t i o n s a b o u t o u r o r d i n a r y l a n g u a g e , o r i s t h e r es o m e o t h e r a r g u m e n t t o s u p p o r t t h i s c l a i m ?

D.D. W e l l , I t h i n k e v o l u t i o n a r y t h i n k i n g c a n g i v e g o o d g r o u n d s f o r th a t c l ai m : e v o -l u t i o n m a k e s a g e n t s w i t h i m p e r f e c t k n o w l e d g e , b u t w h e n t h o s e a g e n t s a t t e m p t t oe x p l o i t t h ei r i m p e r f e c t k n o w l e d g e t h e y t r e a t o t h e r a g e n ts a s r a ti o n al , b e c a u s e t hi si s t h e m o s t e f f i c i e n t w a y f o r t h e m t o e x p l o i t th e i r i m p e r f e c t k n o w l e d g e o f t h ew o r l d . T h e r e i s n o b e t t e r s t r a t e g y f o r p r e d i c t i n g t h e b e h a v i o r o f a n o t h e r a g e n tt h an a s s u m i n g t h a t i t i s a t l e a s t a s r a ti o n a l a s y o u a re .

M.M.: C a n y o u s a y s o m e t h i n g m o r e a b o u t t h e n o t io n o f r a t i o n a li t y y o u a r e t a l k in ga b o u t ? A f t e r a l l, th e r e i s l e s s th a n u n i v e r s a l a g r e e m e n t o n w h a t t h e w o r d ' r a ti o -n a l ' a c t u a l l y m ean s , an d y o u h av e c l a i m ed t h a t r a t i o n a l i t y i s a i n t r i n s i ca l l yp re - t h eo re t i ca l n o t i o n 7.

7 D e n n e t t , 1 9 8 7 ( R e f l ec t i o n s t o D e n n e t t 1981) .


8/12


D.D. Yes , t h a t ' s wh a t I t h i n k , an d i t d o es n ' t em b a r ra s s m e t h a t I c an n o t d e f i n e i t . It h i n k t h a t it is t h e n a t u r e o f it th a t p r o p o s e d d e f i n it i o n s a r e i n e f f e c t p r o p o s e dr e d u c t i o n s o f r a t io n a l it y ; a n d s i n c e w e a l w a y s u n d e r s t a n d t h e h y p o t h e s i s t h a tt h e y f a i l o r th a t t h e y m i g h t f a i l, w e a l l j u s t h a v e t o s e e w h e t h e r t h i s d o e s j u s t i c et o o u r n o t i o n o f ra t io n a li ty . T h i s s h o w s t h a t w e a r e u s i n g t h e c o n c e p t o f r a ti o n a l-i ty a s a s or t o f n o rm a t i v e m a x i m u m a s y e t u n d e f in e d , b e c a u s e w e c a n i m a g i n es o m e b o d y p u tt i n g f o r w a r d a d e f in i t io n o f r a t i o n a li t y w h i c h i s su b s t a n t ia l l yi n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h o u r p r a c t i c e b u t o n r e f l e c t i o n w e f o u n d w a s b e t t e r , t h a t g a v eb e t t e r r e s u lt s . I s n ' t i t t r u e t ha t w h e r e v e r w e f i n d s u c h a p r o p o s a l , w e a d o p t it , a n dw e e n l a r g e o u r n o t i o n o f ra t i o n a li t y t o i n c lu d e i t? W h e n g o o d p r o b a b i l i s ti c r e a -s o n i n g i s fo rm u l a t ed t h a t r ep a i r s t h e fu zzy , i n fo rm a l p ro b ab i l i s t i c r e a s o n i n g t h a tg av e b i r t h t o it ; f ro m t h a t m o m en t , w e u n d e r s t a n d t h a t it i s r a t i o n a l fo r u s t o r e l yo n a c a l c u l u s o f p r o b a b i l it y , a n d s o w e a d d i t t o o u r v i s i o n o f w h a t r a t io n a l i tyco n s i s t s o f . An d I t h i n k we d i d t h e s am e t h i n g ea r l i e r w i t h l o g i c . As i t we reAr i s t o t l e wa s t h e f ir s t t o p ro p o s e t h a t s o r t o f p ro s t h e t i c d e v i ce fo r r a t io n a l i t y : t h eT o o l , t h e O r g a n o n . A n d p e o p l e s a y : ' y e s ' ! T h a t ' s a p a rt o f w h a t i t i s t o b e ra t io -n a l. T o b e b o u n d b y t h i s t o o l s h a r p e n e d o u r n o t i o n o f ra t io n a li ty .

M.M. W h a t a re , a c c o r d i n g t o y o u , t h e i m p l i c a t io n s o f t hi s s t r o n g k i n d o f n at u r al -i s m w i t h r e s p e c t to e p i s t e m o l o g y ? D o y o u t h i n k t h e r e w i l l s ti ll b e a p l a c e f o r n o r -m a t i v i t y i n e p i s t e m o l o g y ?

D.D. I h a v e n e v e r t h o u g h t t h a t n a t u r a l i z e d e p i s t e m o l o g y w a s e n t i r e l y n o t n o r m a -t i v e . No , I h av e t h o u g h t t h a t t o s ay t h a t i t was n a t u ra l i z ed was s i m p l y t o s ay t h a ti t w a s g o i n g t o b e g i n w i t h t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t w e w e r e c o g n i z e r s t h a t w e r e n a t -u ra l , t h a t i s , we we re ev o l v ed b i o l o g i ca l b e i n g s ; t h a t we h ad l i m i t a t i o n s an d t h a tt h e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m s t h a t w e f a c e a r e t h e p r o b l e m s o f li v i ng e n t i ti e s i na b i o lo g i c a l w o r l d . N o w , th a t r e m o v e s t h e s o r t o f h y p e r - id e a l i z a t i o n s o f s o m e t ra -d i ti o n a l e p i s t e m o l o g y ; i t ' s a w a y o f m a k i n g i t c l e a r th a t w e h a v e t o c o n s i d e rt h i n g s l i k e t h e co s t -b e n e f i t c a l cu l u s . Yo u g e t a v e ry d i f f e r en t p i c t u re o f ep i s t e -m o l o g y i f y o u t h in k o f a so r t o f s u l ta n p r o t e c t e d i n h is c o u r t w h o h a s n o t h i n g t od o a l l d a y b u t a v o i d e r ro r a n d i s f e d a n d p r o t e c t e d f r o m h a r m a n d c a n j u s t d e v o t ee v e r y w a k i n g m i n u t e t o m a t h e m a t i c s . T h a t m a n c a n b e a c a r t e s i a n b e c a u s e i td o e s n ' t m a t t e r h o w l o n g i t t a k e s h im t o w o r k o u t t h e p r o b l e m a n d i t d o e s n ' t m a t -t er h o w m u c h e n e r g y h e h a s t o s p e n d to w o r k o u t th e p r o b l e m a n d i t d o e s n ' t m a t -t e r w h e t h e r t h e p r o b l e m s a r e i m p o r t a n t . A l l t h a t m a t t e r s i s t h a t h e d o e s n ' t m a k ea m i s t ak e , t h a t h e g e t s c e r t a in t y . W e l l , in o n e s en s e I d o n ' t t h i n k t h e re i s an y t h i n gw r o n g w i t h th e v i s i o n y o u g e t o f e p i s t e m o l o g y u n d e r t h a t s o rt o f a s s u m p t i o n : i tt u rn s o u t t o a d d r e s s m a n y o f th e i n t er e s ti n g e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m s t h a t w ea c t u a l l y fa c e , b u t w h e n y o u a d d r e s s e p i s t e m o l o g y i n t hi s p u r e c a r t e s ia n a p r io r is -t i c s p i r i t , t h i n g s p u zz l e y o u t h a t a r e n o t p u zz l i n g f ro m a n a t u ra l i s t i c p e r s p ec t i v e ,o r s o it s e e m s t o m e . B u t I d o n ' t s e e n a t u r a l iz e d e p i s t e m o l o g y a s a w a y o f a ba n -d o n i n g t h e n o r m a t i v i t y o f e p i s t e m o l o g y .

L e t ' s t a k e a n e x a m p l e . C e r t ai n ly , o n e c a n b e i n t e r e s te d i n t h e n o r m s o f h ea l th :w h e t h e r o n e o u g h t t o e a t ; w h e t h e r o n e o u g h t t o e x e r c i s e ; w h e t h e r o n e o u g h t t o


9/12

De nne tt & Mirolli - A naturalistic pe rspe ctive on intentionality

s l ee p a n d a ll th e s e t h in g s . T h a t ' s n o r m a t i v e , b u t it w o n ' t b e a n y g o o d u n l e s s i t' sn a t u r a l iz e d h e a l t h th e o r y , b e c a u s e i f w e r e a l l y w a n t t o k n o w w h a t w e h a v e t o e a tan d w h y , t h en y o u ' d b e t t e r to b e a n a t u ra li s t. N o w , 1 t h i n k i t 's l ik e t h a t : n a t u ra l-i z e d e p i s t e m o l o g y i s j u s t h o w t o s a t i sf y y o u r e p i s t e m i c h u n g e r i n t h e b e s t p o ss i -b l e w a y .T h a t ' s s o r t o f f u n n y . I m a g i n e s o m e b o d y w h o s ai d: " M y g o a l i s t o e a t a s m u c has p o s s ib l e , i n m y w h o l e l if e " . I f i t r ea l l y is y o u r g o a l , t h en w e can s t o p an d f i g -u r e o u t h o w b e s t to e a t a s m u c h a s p o s si b le . W e c o u l d t a k e it t h a t o u r s u m m u mb o n u m i s e a t i n g a s m u c h a s p o s s i b l e a n d w e c o u l d a s k : g i v e n t h e c o n s t r a i n t o fn a t u r a li s m , w h a t s h o u l d y o u d o ? N o w , s w i t c h f r o m f o o d t o k n o w l e d g e . Y o u w a n tt o k n o w a s m u c h a s p o s s i b l e . W e l l , i t l o o k s l i k e a m u c h m o r e r e a s o n a b l e g o a lt h an ea t i n g a s mu ch a s p o s s i b le , b u t w e m i g h t a s k : is it r ea l l y ? W h a t a r e t h e g o a l so f e p i s t e m o l o g y i n t h e f ir s t p l a c e ? W h a t a r e y o u t r y in g to m a x i m i z e ? W h a t a r ey o u t r y i n g t o o p t im i s e ? I m e a n : t h a t ' s t h e n o r m a t i v e o f e p i s t e m o l o g y . B u t I d o n ' tt h i n k w e a r e j u s t g i v e n w h a t t h e r i g h t a n s w e r s t o t h o s e q u e s t io n s a r e w i t h o u ta l r ead y g o i n g n a t u ra l is t ic .

M.M. T h a t ' s t r u e , b u t I th i n k t h a t t h e p o i n t o f n a t u r a l is m i s th a t y o u c a n n e v e r g e to u t s i d e t h e s y s t e m a n d j u d g e f r o m a n i n f a ll ib l e p o in t o f v i e w , s o n o k i n d o f n o r-m a t i v i ty c a n b e a b s o lu t e .

D.D.: W el l , t h a t ' s p a r t o f t h e p o i n t , I w o u l d t h i n k . I t h i n k t h e re a r e man y a s p ec t s .O n e o f th e p o i n t s o f n a t u r a l i z e d e p i s t e m o l o g y I w o u l d s t re s s i s th a t i f y o u d o n ' td o t h a t , th en , i n s p i te o f y o u r p r e t en s i o n s t o an a l y t i c r i g o u r a t co n cep t u a l an a l y -s is , y o u , i n f ac t , h av e g o t b l i n k e r s . Y o u ' r e o n l y l e t t in g y o u r s e l f co n s i d e r t h o s ea s p ec t s o f h u m a n p r a c ti c e w h i c h a r e c l e a r ly c o n s o l id a t e d in o u r e v e r y d a y c o n -c e p ts . S u p p o s e y o u w a n t t o k n o w w h e t h e r k n o w l e d g e i s j u s t if i e d tr u e b e li e f : th i sj u s t b e c o m e s a b a t t le o f d e f in i ti o n s a n d c o u n t e r e x a m p l e s . N o w , t h e q u e s t i o n i s:w e l l , w h e r e a r e y o u g e t t in g y o u r p r e m i s e s ? G e t r e f l e c t i v e a b o u t y o u r m e t h o d o l -o g y a n d a s k y o u r s e l f : w h a t a r e th e g r o u n d s f o r t h e c o n c l u s io n s t h a t y o u ' r e d r a w -i n g a b o u t t h e s e v a r i o u s d e f i n i ti o n s a n d c o u n t e r e x a m p l e s ? W e ll , j u s t y o u r s e n s eo f w h a t t h e w o r d s m e a n : c o n c e p t u a l a n a ly s is , t h a t' s w h a t y o u a r e d o i n g . . .

M.M. C o u l d y o u e x p l a i n w h i c h a r e , a c c o r d i n g to y o u , t h e r e la t io n s h i p s b e t w e e n t h ep h i l o s o p h e r a n d t h e s c ie n t is t f r o m a n a t u ra l is t ic p o i n t o f v i e w ?

D.D. W e l l, I w o u l d s a y th a t t h e p h i l o s o p h e r is j u s t o n e m o r e e n q u i re r , o n e m o r ei n v es t i g a t o r . I t h i n k t h a t t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w een a p h i l o s o p h e r an d a s c i en t i s t i sn o t d e e p e r t h a n t h e d i s ti n c ti o n b e t w e e n a c h e m i s t a n d a m a t h e m a t i c i a n o r a b i o l-o g i s t an d a g e o l o g i s t ; th a t i s, s l i g h t l y d i f f e r en t m e t h o d s an d s l i g h t l y d i f f e r en tg o a l s , b u t t h ey a r e a l l a s k i n g q u es t i o n s c r i t i c a l l y an d r e f l e c t i v e l y an d t ry i n g toa n s w e r t h e m , a n d t h e y a l l h a v e t h e g o a l o f g e t t i n g t h e f i g h t a n s w e r s . T h e r e i sn o t h i n g t h a t mak es p h i l o s o p h y s p ec i a l . W e l l , I t h i n k t h a t t h e i s s u es a r e a t l e a s ts t ro n g l y s u g g es t i v e o f , i f n o t e n t i r e l y p a ra l l e l t o , th e i s s u e ab o u t t h e n a t u re o fm a t h e m a t i c s . T h e r e i s a s tr o n g c a se t o b e m a d e f o r m a t h e m a t i c s b e i n g a c o m -


10/12

Mind & Socie ty , 6 , 2002, Vol . 3

p l e t e l y a u t o n o m o u s f i e l d , o n l y i n c i d e n t a l l y a p p l i e d . T h e r e i s a l s o a c a s e t h a tc o u l d b e m a d e t h a t m a t h e m a t i c s d i d n ' t j u s t g e t b o r n o u t o f s u r v e y i n g a n d c o u n t -i n g a n d o t h e r w o r l d l y i s su e s. B u t t h e f u n d a m e n t a l c o n c e p t s o f m a t h e m a t i c s a r es t i l l a n c h o r e d t o t h e w o r l d t h r o u g h i t s v a r i o u s s o u r c e s . S o y o u s h o u l d s e e m a t h -e m a t i c s a s a s o r t o f l im i t i n g c a s e o f e m p i r i c a l e n q u i r y . B u t i t s e e m s t o m e t h es a m e i s s u e a r is e s f o r p h i l o s o p h y a s w e l l: a s y o u s e e , p h i l o s o p h y i s j u s t a s o r t o fl i m i t i n g c a s e o f e m p i r i c a l e n q u i r y . T h e m o s t g e n e r a l , t h e h i g h e s t l e v e l . T h a t ' s t h ew a y I t e n d t o s e e it. I th i n k t h e c a s e f o r m a t h e m a t i c s b e i n g a n a u t o n o m o u se n q u i r y i s b e t t e r th a n t h a t f o r p h i l o s o p h y . I t h i n k P l a t o a s p i r e d t o m a k e p h i l o s o -p h y a s a u t o n o m o u s a s m a t h e m a t i c s a n d p h i l o s o p h e r s e v e r s in c e h a v e t a k e n m a t h -e m a t i c s a s t h e i r i d e al . B u t i t d o e s n ' t w o r k !

T o c o n c l u d e , I w a n t t o te ll y o u a s t o r y : b a c k i n 1 9 7 8 I m e t a m a t h e m a t i c i a nw h o w a s g e t ti n g v e r y i n t e re s t e d in lo g i c a n d i n p h i l o s o p h y . W e w o u l d h a v e l u n c ht w o o r t h re e d a y s a w e e k i n th o s e d a y s a n d h e g o t r e a d in g Q u i n e o n m y s u g g e s -t io n . H e l o v e d a n d h a t e d h i m . O n e d a y h e s a id : " W h e n e v e r th i ng s g e t r e a ll yp h i l o s o p h i c a l i n Q u i n e ' s w o r k h e s ta rt s m a k i n g j o k e s a n d b e c o m i n g l e s s s e ri o us .W h y i s t h a t ? " I k n o w t h a t i t 's n o t t r u e , I m e a n : I h a d n e v e r f o u n d t h a t ti ll t h e n ,a n d I ' s t i l l t h i n k i t i s n o t t r u e , b u t I s a i d : " I t h i n k I k n o w w h a t y o u m e a n , a n d It h i n k I k n o w w h y . I t ' s b e c a u s e e v e n t h o u g h Q u i n e i s a g r e a t p h i l o s o p h e r , I t h i n kh e ' s n e v e r q u i te b e e n a b le t o c o n v i n c e h i m s e l f th a t p h i l o s o p h y i s p r o p e r w o r k f o rg r o w n m e n . I t h i n k h e is a l w a y s a li tt le b it e m b a r r a s s e d t o b e a p h i l o s o p h e r , a n dh e t h i n k s i t i s n o t q u i t e a s s e r i o u s o r o b v i o u s l y w o r t h w h i l e w o r k a s b e i n g a s c i-e n t is t . S o w h e n h e f i n d s h i m s e l f b e i n g e s p e c i a l l y a p h i l o s o p h e r h e g e t s a li t tl e b i ts h y a n d e m b a r r a s s e d a n d s t a r ts t e ll i n g j o k e s " . O n c e I a s k e d Q u i n e , a n d h e s a i dt h e r e w a s s o m e t r u t h i n th i s. H e t h o u g h t o f h i m s e l f a s a l o g i c i a n fi r st , a n d a s ap h i l o s o p h e r o n l y b y a c c i d e n t.

Critical bibl iographyDahlbom, Bo (Ed.) (1993) Dennett and His Critics (Cambridge MA , Basil Blackwell).An important collection of articles by Dennett's critics and his reply to them. The 'unhortodox'introduction b y D ahlbom is o f special interest because it is the best of the v ery few attempts to givea com prehensive analysis of Dennett 's philosophy.Dennett, Daniel C. (1969) Content and Consciousness (London, Routledge & K egan Paul).

The PhD thesis o f Dennett, w ritten under the supervision of G ylbert Ryle. There are two main rea-sons to recomm end the reading o f this book: first, the most im portant ingredients of Dennett's phi-losophy are already present in this relatively sho rt book; second, this is wh ere both Denn ett's debtstowards Ryle and Quine and his very new id eas are m ore explicit.Dennett, Daniel C. (1978) Brainstorms (Montgom ery VT, Bradford Book s).

Th e first collection of Dennett's articles, divided in fo ur parts . Th e first is about the gen eralassumptions of his philosophy, while the others are dedicated to the three particular themes inwhich Denn ett has divided his work: intentionality, consciousn ess, and free will.

10


11/12

Dennett & Mirolli - A naturalistic perspective on intentionality

Dennett, Daniel C. (1981) Making Sense of Ourselves, Philosophical Topics, 12, n. 1, special number,reprinted as J. Biro & S. Shanan (Eds), Mind, Brain and Functionalism, Norman, University ofOklaoma Press 1982; now in Dennett 1987.The response to Stephen Stich's "Dennett on Intentional Systems", Philosophical Topics, 12, 1981,reprinted in W.G. Lycan (Ed.), Mind and Cognition, Oxford - Cambridge MA, Basil Blackwell,1990, 4 h edition 1994. In this article - and in the reflections on it (appeared in Dennett 1987) -Dennett discusses in depth his thesis of the presupposition of rationality implicit in all intentionalattributions.

Dennett, Daniel C. (1984)Elbow Room: the Varieties of Free Will Worth Wanting (Oxford, OxfordUniversity Press).Dennett's book on free will. An interesting discussion on the notion of 'intuition pumps ' and ontheir importance and dangerousness in the philosopher's methodology can be found here.

Dennett, Daniel C. (1987) The Intentional Stance (Cambridge MA, The MIW Press).The book dedicated to Dennett's theory of intentionality. It's a collection of articles posterior toBrainstorms. I recommend "True Believers", "Three Kinds of Intentional Psychology", "Styles ofMental Representations", "Evolution, Error and Intentionality" and, especially, "Starting On theRight Foot", which is a sort of introduction where Dennett unusually makes explicit his theoreti-cal and methodological assumptions.

Dennett, Daniel C. (1988) Prrcis of The Intentional Stance, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11.A sort of summary of Dennett 1987, followed by a collection of critics by a number of philoso-phers, cognitive psychologists, artificial intel ligence researchers and evolutionary biologists, andby Dennett's response to them.

Deimett, Daniel C. (1991a) Real Patterns, Journal of Philosophy, LXXXVIII (1), reprinted in Dennett,1998.Dennett's ultimate word on ontology of intentional entities (and on ontology in general).

Dennett, Daniel C. (1991b) Two Black Boxes, http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/papers/twoblack.htm#1.An 'intuitionpump' (that is a mental experiment) buil t in order to reveal the necessity of intentionallanguage for describing and explicating some 'real patterns'.

Dennett, Daniel C. (1991c) Consciousness Explained (Boston, Little Brown and Company).A deep, extensive, penetrating and illuminating book that try to resolve (or 'dissolve', or 'elude' )the hardest problem (or 'pseudo-problem', or 'mystery') left to science: consciousness.

Dennett, Daniel C. (1993) "Back from the Drawing Board", in Dahlbom (Ed.), 1993.The reply to Dennett's critics, which includes interesting defences of two Dennett 's practices: hisdiscomfort with giving labels to his theories and his denial of 'playing the game of ontology ' tooseriously.

Dennett , Daniel C. (1994) "Self-Portrait", in S. Guttenplan (Ed.), A Companion to the Philosophy ofMind (Oxford, Basil Blackwell), reprinted in Dennett , 1998.Very important article, where Dennett self-analyses his work with an historical perspective.Together with Dennett 1969 and the first chapter of Dennett 1987 ("Starting On the Right Foot"),it is certainly the place in which Dennett is more explicit about his debts towards Ryle and Quine.

Dennett, Daniel C. (1995) Darwin's Dangerous Idea. Evolution and the Meanings of Life (New York,Simon and Schuster).

11


12/12

M i n d & S o c i e t y , 6 , 2 0 0 2 , V o l . 3

A n impo r t an t book on the theory of evolu t ion by na tural se lec tion and i ts up shot s on ph i losophyof science, phi loso phy o f mind, ontolog y, social sciences, and ethics.

Dennett , Daniel C. (1996) Kind s o f Mind s : Towards an Unders tanding o f Con sc iousnes s (London,Phoenix) .A ve ry useful int roduct ion to De nne t t ' s theory of mind: short, e asy-to-rea d and fascinat ing.

Dennett , Daniel C. (1998) Brainch i ldren (London, Penguin Books) .A col lect ion of the last m ost impo rtant articles by Dennet t. Th ey co ver various subjects and disci-plines, such as ph ilos op hy of m ind, art ificial intelligence, art ificial l ife, cogn it ive eth olo gy andme thodology fo r cogni t ive sc i ence.

12

a naturalistic perspective on intentionality - interview with dd

Documents