I’ve written here, here, and here.
Today the new paper was accepted for a special issue of the Journal of Consciousness Studies edited by Richard Brown. If anyone has comments, they would be very welcome. (Brown has requested the final version ASAP.)
I’m curious what you think of Davidson’s radical interpretation and the clarifications to it offered by Ludwig and LePore.
This Brown sounds very demanding!
Hi Gualtiero,
Congrats on the acceptance and thanks for the acknowledgment!
Thanks for the comments!
Tony, I don’t remember enough about Davidson and I don’t know enough about Ludwig and Lepore on Davidson to form an informed opinion. Should I look into it?
Richard, thanks again for organizing the fabulous Consciousness Online conference and for editing the special issue of JCS.
Hi, Gualtiero,
Congratulations again on Lori Lea Shelley-P!
Back in the ’80’s people used to ask why Dennett wasn’t Davidson (or vice versa); and your list of 6 changes reminded me of candidate catalogues of the differences. Davidson did not, I think, propose to treat speakers as measuring instruments; I think your idea is genuinely new and different. (I need to mull over the idea for a few days; I’m worried that there are disanalogies there also.) Davidson did think of interpretation in terms of measurement (the empirical system is the speaker, and the measurement system is the interpreter’s own language), but that points only in the direction of the interpreter using instruments to gather data for interpretation, but not yet to saying what instruments those might be. Let me know if you want refs to Davidson. I’m not actually certain what Ludwig and Lepore would say in this area, but they’re the go-to guys for Davidson exegesis.
–Tony