2013/01/09 CAPEレクチャー・Sungho Choi氏講演会

講師:Prof. Sungho Choi (Kyonhee University, Seoul)
演題:Defying Achilles’ Heel

Manley and Wasserman raise a number of criticisms of the conditional
analyses of dispositions currently on offer – most notably, the simple
conditional analysis – such as those featuring what they call
Achilles’ heel and its reverse cousin. Their criticisms, thought to
bring up interesting aspects of dispositions that haven’t received due
attention in the literature, are ever since embraced by many leading
scholars, who are further led to the conclusion that there is no hope
for the simple conditional analysis. But I will argue below that this
conclusion is immature, for Manley and Wasserman’s criticisms can be
fended off by viewing the simple conditional analysis as an analysis
of canonical dispositions and supplementing it with an improved way of
cashing out conventionals dispositions in terms of canonical
dispositions. This upshot is hoped to clean up the tanrished
reputation of the simple conditional analysis despite the adverse
pressure from the apparently widespread consensus among philosophers
of dispositions.