The notions of mental representation and intentionality are central to contemporary philosophy of mind and it is usually assumed that these notions, if not originated, at least were made essential to the philosophy of mind by Descartes in the seventeenth century. The authors in this book challenge this assumption and show that the history of these ideas can be traced back to the medieval period. In bringing out the contrasts and similarities between early modern and medieval discussions of mental representation the authors conclude that there is no clear dividing line between western late medieval and early modern philosophy; that they in fact represent one continuous tradition in the philosophy of mind.
Edited by:
Henrik Lagerlund
Imprint: Routledge
Country of Publication: United Kingdom
Dimensions:
Height: 234mm,
Width: 156mm,
Weight: 453g
ISBN: 9781138249721
ISBN 10: 1138249726
Pages: 166
Publication Date: 27 February 2017
Audience:
College/higher education
,
General/trade
,
Primary
,
ELT Advanced
Format: Paperback
Publisher's Status: Active
Chapter I Introduction, Henrik Lagerlund; Chapter II The Terminological and Conceptual Roots of Representation in the Soul in Late Ancient and Medieval Philosophy, Henrik Lagerlund; Chapter III Abstract Truth in Thomas Aquinas, Robert Pasnau; Chapter IV Representation in Scholastic Epistemology, Martin Tweedale; Chapter V Rethinking Representation in the Middle Ages, Peter King; Chapter VI William Ockham and Mental Language, Mikko Yrjönsuuri; Chapter VII The Matter of Thought, Calvin G. Normore; Chapter VIII Objective Being in Descartes, Deborah Brown;
Dr Henrik Lagerlund is Research Associate in the Centre for Research in the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities (CRASSH) at the University of Cambridge, UK.
Reviews for Representation and Objects of Thought in Medieval Philosophy
’The book offers a view of cutting-edge historiography about mental representation in the Middle Ages and beyond, and it is a valuable introduction to the theoretical issues. But it also raises points and problems which both historians and philosophers working on this subject cannot overlook.’ Philosophy in Review
