Sensation Terms

In K. Cahill and T. Raleigh eds, Wittgenstein and Naturalism, Routledge, 2018, pp. 79-95

Wittgenstein’s philosophy involves a general anti-platonism about properties or standards of similarity. On his view, what it is for one thing to have the same property as another is not dictated by reality itself; it depends on our classificatory practices and the standards of similarity they embody. Wittgenstein’s anti-platonism plays an important role in the private language sections and in his discussion of the conceptual problem of other minds. In sharp contrast to Wittgenstein’s views stands the contemporary doctrine of natural properties, which holds that there is an objective hierarchy of naturalness amongst properties, a hierarchy that is completely independent of our concepts or practices. Some authors have appealed to the natural properties view to offer an explicitly anti-Wittgensteinian account of sensation concepts. The paper discusses these competing views of properties and sensation concepts. It is argued that, if our account of concepts of conscious states starts from a commitment to natural properties, we are bound to recognize that our actual classificatory practices also play a crucial role in determining which properties our concepts pick out. On the other hand, if we start from the anti-platonist position, we are bound to recognize that we also need a notion of sameness of property that extends beyond our limited capacity to recognize similarity or sameness of property. The correct view, it is concluded, must occupy a middle position between an extreme anti-realism about properties and an extreme version of the natural properties view. It is suggested that Wittgenstein’s own view does just that.

Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 2015

Since the rise of modern natural science there has been deep tension between the concep-tual and the natural. Wittgenstein’s discussion of how we learn a sensation-language con-tains important resources that can help us relieve this tension. The key here, I propose, is to focus our attention on animal nature, conceived as partially re-enchanted (in the sense recommended by John McDowell). To see how nature, so conceived, helps us relieve the tension in question, it is crucial to gain a firm and detailed appreciation of how the primi-tive-instinctive, a central part of animal nature, actually serves the conceptual. I offer such an appreciation by closely examining §244 of the Philosophical Investigations and Peter Winch’s discussion of it. The general aim is to bring out a certain kind of Wittgensteinian “naturalism” (not as a theory but as a general reminder), a “naturalism” that is fully alive to the rootedness of conceptuality in nature. A concomitant aim is to illustrate the truth of Wittgenstein’s saying that in philosophy one often has to pay close attention to details.

This paper aims to show that Wittgenstein's approach to the concepts of sensation and emotion can shed light on many philosophical dilemmas that remain present in the contemporary debate. My analysis will start by characterizing Jesse Prinz's approach to emotions (heavily influenced by the physiological theory of William James) and, then, it will proceed to show that Prinz is subject to the same criticisms that Wittgenstein expressed about William James's theory. Finally, I will argue that Wittgenstein, in Philosophical Investigations, advocated for a peculiar kind of expressivism that, while having profound differences from traditional expressivism, is able to appear as a non-cognitivist position. I will argue further that William James's error (and hence also Prinz's) is disregarding the multiple uses of psychological terms (that is, to think that psychological terms have a uniform use).

Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, 2018

Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics (SAPERE) publishes new developments and advances in all the fields of philosophy, epistemology, and ethics, bringing them together with a cluster of scientific disciplines and technological outcomes: from computer science to life sciences, from economics, law, and education to engineering, logic, and mathematics, from medicine to physics, human sciences, and politics. It aims at covering all the challenging philosophical and ethical themes of contemporary society, making them appropriately applicable to contemporary theoretical, methodological, and practical problems, impasses, controversies, and conflicts. The series includes monographs, lecture notes, selected contributions from specialized conferences and workshops as well as selected Ph.D. theses.

This paper is both systematic and historical in nature. From a historical viewpoint, I aim to show that to establish Wittgenstein's claim that " an 'inner process' stands in need of outward criteria " (PI §580) there is an enthymeme in Wittgenstein's private language argument (henceforth PLA) overlooked in the literature, namely Wittgenstein's suggestion that both perceptual and bodily experiences are transparent in the relevant sense that one cannot point to a mental state and wonder " What is that? " From a systematic viewpoint, I aim to show that Wittgenstein's PLA teaches us that the prevailing picture of the nature of phenomenal concepts (henceforth PCs) is upside down: we can only introspectively know what is going on inside our heads, after we learn of what is going on outside (PI §580). In this regard, I aim to defend two associate claims against the prevailing view of PCs on the basis of PLA. First, by means of transparency, I aim to show that there is no de re awareness of our private sensation that could determine the meaning of sensation-words; for example, I am never aware of the phenomenal blueness of my experience of something blue. The second associated claim is that introspective self-knowledge of our private sensation is always de dicto. We can only know introspectively that phenomenal blueness is the phenomenal character of the experience we are undergoing after we have learned that (de dicto knowledge) blue is the color that usually causes in us that kind of experience. Likewise, we can only introspectively know that pain is the phenomenal character of the experience we are undergoing after we have learned that pain is what usually causes some typical pain behavior.

The realm of phenomena opened up by the question, ‘What are feelings?’, is both vast and strange, even though it is the familiar realm of our everyday lives together. It has remained hidden from us because, simply, it is too familiar to us. Whilst the main integrating thread running through this article is a Wittgensteinian one – suggesting a shift in our attention from the role of feelings within us out into our interactions with the others and othernesses around us – certain other accounts that can help us gain a more well articulated sense of the expressive dynamics of our bodily activities are examined also. The overall result is to suggest a revolution in our thinking, a shift from spatialized forms of thought, working in terms of ordered sequences of static, visualizable forms, to dynamized modes of imageless thought, working in terms of felt temporally emerging, always unfinished (and thus unnameable), invisible shapes along with a shift away from a concern with patterns, regularities, and repetitions, toward a concern with singularities, with only once-occurrent events of Being (Bakhtin, 1993, p.2), with events continually occurring for yet another first time (Garfinkel, 1967, p.9).

S. Schroeder (ed.), Wittgenstein and Contemporary Philosophy of Mind, 2001

Veritas, 2016

This paper aims to show that Wittgenstein's approach to the concepts of sensation and emotion can shed light on many philosophical dilemmas that remain present in the contemporary debate. My analysis will start by characterizing Jesse Prinz's approach to emotions (heavily influenced by the physiological theory of William James) and, then, it will proceed to show that Prinz is subject to the same criticisms that Wittgenstein expressed about William James's theory. Finally, I will argue that Wittgenstein, in Philosophical Investigations, advocated for a peculiar kind of expressivism that, while having profound differences from traditional expressivism, is able to appear as a non-cognitivist position. I will argue further that William James's error (and hence also Prinz's) is disregarding the multiple uses of psychological terms (that is, to think that psychological terms have a uniform use).

Filozofski vestnik, 2022

It is the praxis of being a subject in the world which enables psychoanalysis to theorise subjectivity. Freud theorised subjectivity from the perspective of desires, those repressed unconscious forces which conflict with the subjects’ need to live in the world. The upshot of this conflict for the subject is trauma and for psychoanalysis such trauma provides a way into a remedy, a cure, the presumption of psychoanalysis being that through its method of transference, it does indeed possess the knowledge to pursue a remedy. Lacan offers a new interpretation of Freud by considering the subject as an ongoing ontological enigma in so far as subjective unconscious desire is not only (potentially) traumatic but necessarily (always) linguistic. How is this an ontological enigma? For Lacan the subject is first and foremost a speaking being engaged in an ongoing struggle to articulate unconscious desire. This is because, claims Lacan, we are born into language which not only pre-exists us but continues after death. In this way subjectivity is inescapably oriented to language as simultaneously intrinsic external to it. The unconscious is therefore a mixture of inside and outside, an enigmatic (pre)ontological space which Lacan calls extimacy. This essay seeks to explore Lacan’s orientation of the subject towards extimacy as the site of subjective conflict where, in its quest for the subject’s desire to know and handle the symptom, transference engages a new ontological dimension in which we can say that the extimate is structured like a sensation.