Brandom’s attempt to motivate inferentialism is found wanting on a number of grounds, including a skepticism about how much recommendation for inferentialism can be derived from the evident unsatisfactoriness of the representationalism Brandom contrasts it with, which seems to be a straw man. Brandom’s appeal to authorities (Sellars, Frege, Dummett) falls flat; in particular, his reading of Frege’s early work as inferentialist in Brandom’s sense is a misinterpretation. Given the programmatic character of Brandom’s recommendation for inferentialism, the quality of the motivation he offers for it matters more than he has acknowledged.
Felka, Katharina, Benjamin Schnieder, Thomas Ede Zimmermann, Miguel Hoeltje, Severin Schroeder, Andreas Kemmerling, Manfred Harth, Geert Keil, Lars Dänzer, Bernd Prien, Nathalie Lötscher, Sarah-Jane Conrad, Peter Schulte & Christian Nimtz
2015. Analytische Sprachphilosophie. In Handbuch Sprachphilosophie, ► pp. 175 ff.
HENDLEY, STEVEN
2010. Answerable to the World: Experience and Practical Intentionality in Brandom's and McDowell's “Intramural” Debate. Theoria 76:2 ► pp. 129 ff.
Lauer, David
2012. Expressivism and the Layer Cake Picture of Discursive Practice. Philosophia 40:1 ► pp. 55 ff.
Redding, Paul
2015. An Hegelian Solution to a Tangle of Problems Facing Brandom'S Analytic Pragmatism. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 23:4 ► pp. 657 ff.
Whiting, Daniel
2006. Between primitivism and naturalism: Brandom’s theory of meaning. Acta Analytica 21:3 ► pp. 3 ff.
Whiting, Daniel
2008. Meaning Holism andDe ReAscription. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 38:4 ► pp. 575 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.