Fodor on concepts and Frege Puzzles
Article first published online: 28 AUG 2003
DOI: 10.1111/1468-0114.00063
University of Southern California and Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1998
Additional Information
How to Cite
Aydede, M. (1998), Fodor on concepts and Frege Puzzles. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 79: 289–294. doi: 10.1111/1468-0114.00063
Publication History
- Issue published online: 28 AUG 2003
- Article first published online: 28 AUG 2003
- Abstract
- Cited By
Fodor characterizes concepts as consisting of two dimensions: one is content, which is purely denotational/broad, the other the Mentalese vehicle bearing that content, which Fodor calls the mode of presentation (MOP), understood “syntactically.” I argue that, so understood, concepts are not interpersonally shareable; so Fodor’s own account violates what he calls the Publicity Constraint in his (1998) book. Furthermore, I argue that Fodor’s non-semantic solution to Frege cases succumbs to the problem of providing interpersonally applicable functional roles for MOPs. This is a serious problem because Fodor himself has argued extensively that if Fregean senses or meanings are understood as functional/conceptual roles, then they can’t be public, since, according to Fodor, there are no interpersonally applicable functional roles.

1468-0114/asset/PAPQ_centre.gif?v=1&s=e84ad797c41b896ac6e6cd4fc5a4a6abb1f43e79)
1468-0114/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=098cb6eb84e466c9544dce6dfe01d51a6ebe27c7)