Your Status: Logged out Log in

Millikan's theory.  

Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Mon Dec 22 2003

Page Preview
Preview
Previous 1 of 9 Next

On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:

Representations are for Millikan part of a larger group of entities for which she considers there is no generic name in English, and which would include "[n]atural signs, animals' signs, people's signs, indexes, signals, indicators, symbols, representations, sentences, maps, charts, pictures" [LTOBC, 85]. For want of a better term, Millikan calls these entities signs, and claims that what is common to all signs is their being, to a greater or lesser degree, intentional. That is, what all signs have in common, in a family resemblance way, is their bearing a certain relationship to entities other than themselves - a relationship which is usually characterized as "being about something else", "meaning something else". In what follows, I will consider what the nature of this "being about something else" is according to Millikan. I will pay particular attention to mental, or inner, representations, despite the fact that Millikan believes "articulate conventional signs"...

To see the full version of this document, and 144,847 others

Register Now