Talk:Jerry Fodor

message: --Francesco Franco 17:00, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extremely exhausted 

message: Posted second installment. I'll keep working on it.--Lacatosias 17:06, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Posted 

message: The article has very long sections. I'm sure they could be broken up into sub-sections so as not to appear so drawn-out. joturner 16:11, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good article status added. joturner 16:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed Good Article

message: The footnotes are a mess.  The superscripts do not correspond to the listed references.  Some of the items listed as references (e.g., Carnap, Harman) do not appear to be cited in the body.  I'm not going to try to change them myself, since I am not sure that I would fix them properly.
: Yes, yes, give me a chance please!! I have just tranformed the artcile into three or four separete artcile and I had to move out the referenecs that correspond with the footnotes on the other pages.
Keep in midn, I've doe ALL of this work by myself. I'll have the references on THIS page (the tiothers are alerady in order) straightened out this afternoon.--Lacatosias 09:06, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also please sign you damned posts!! Critisms are welcome but anonymity (and I don't have admin status so I can't check into the logs as far as I know) is rude.
--Lacatosias 09:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ( half hour later) So what's the problem now??--Lacatosias 10:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes 

message: It seems that the photo of Fodor will have to be taken down because of uncertainty of copyright status. That's unfortunate. I think it defintely enhances the quality of the article for non-academic readers. Is it possible for someone over there in the States (I'm in Italy) to try to get copyright permission for this photo or replace it with one that is in the public domain? --Lacatosias 16:22, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Photo is still lacking, BTW. Someone should probably write to Fodor at some point and ask permission, if anyone's has the time and interest any more.--Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 11:03, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't exactly the most becoming photograph, either. static shakedown 20:13, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: I think it would be nice (and prudent) to provide the pronunciation of some surnames that aren't intuitively clear. These include, notably, Fodor, Haugeland, as well as many others. They pose a difficulty for nonnative speakers, and I've even noticed native speakers occasionally stumble over them or pronounce them in different ways. Ariosto 07:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's pronounced "Frodo."137.205.183.109 (talk) 09:55, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: I'll come back and take a look at the "professionally edited" Featured Article that will have been made of this and numerous other philosophy articles in about three months. --Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 20:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: be back

message: Is there any difference? A reductionist is either a reductionist in the weak sense that they think that mental phenomena are entirely determined by physical law (in which case they agree with Fodor), or they're reductionists in the sense that they don't think beliefs, desires, etc. really exist, in which case they're eliminativists. Is there an intermediate position? Cadr 18:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess type physicalism could be a reductionist position which isn't eliminativist and which Fodor doesn't agree with. Cadr 18:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  As on: Searle?137.205.183.109 (talk) 09:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Eliminativism vs. reductionism

message: This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Lampman (talk) 18:51, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Sweeps 

message: The discussion of Gall is inaccurate and uncited. Here is discussion of Gall, http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.002043 Also see the wiki article on him for more info.
Iamwpj (talk) 23:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion of Gall 

message: Substituted at 19:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Jerry Fodor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100126095003/http://www.institutnicod.org/conf.htm to http://www.institutnicod.org/conf.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720171436/http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/lectures/john_locke_lectures/past_lectures to http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/lectures/john_locke_lectures/past_lectures
*Added  tag to http://www.apaonline.org/opportunities/prizes/romanell.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060912061929/http://www.oup.co.uk/pdf/0-19-823636-0.pdf to http://www.oup.co.uk/pdf/0-19-823636-0.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706160533/http://www.revel.inf.br/site2007/_pdf/8/entrevistas/revel_8_interview_jerry_fodor.pdf to http://www.revel.inf.br/site2007/_pdf/8/entrevistas/revel_8_interview_jerry_fodor.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:59, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: So edits to this page should be made to reflect that.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.151.35.4 (talk) 22:57, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jerry passed away today 

message: Fiona Cowey's book, WHAT'S WITHIN (1999), was largely aimed at reviving old-school empiricism of the Lockean sort. I'm simplifying greatly, but she saw Fodor and Chomsky as the chief rationalist innatist threats to her neo-Lockean project and devoted much of the book to a sweeping assault on Fodor in particular. It inspired a lengthy retort from Fodor, sharply worded enough to excite a stir in academia at the time. 
https://ruccs.rutgers.edu/jerry/26-personal-sites/jerry-fodor/277-doing-without-what-s-within-fiona-cowie-s-critique-of-nativism I find it very odd that none of this is mentioned. I inserted a few words under "Criticism" in this article, but it was reverted. I'm not sure why, but perhaps it needs further development. Volunteers? Ideas? --Christofurio (talk) 19:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Absence of Fiona Cowey