The achilles of rationalist psychology
By: edited by Thomas M. Lennon, Robert J. Stainton
Contributors: SpringerLink (Online service)
Series: Studies in the history of philosophy of mind -- v. 7; Studies in the history of philosophy of mind -- v. 7.
Publisher: Springer
Published: 2008
Place of publication: [Dordrecht; London]
Language: eng
Format: [electronic resource] /
Number of pages: 289
ISBN-13: 9781402068935; 9781402068928; 9786611205553
Subjects: Conscience; Philosophie de l'esprit; Consciousness; PHILOSOPHY; Humanism; Philosophy of mind; Rationalisme; Rationalism; Movements
Description: "How is it that the mind perceives the words of a verse as a verse and not just as a string of words? One answer to this question is that to do so the mind itself must already be unified as a simple thing without parts (and perhaps must therefore be immortal). Kant called this argument the Achilles, perhaps because of its apparent invincibility, and perhaps also because it has a fatal weak spot, or perhaps because it is the champion argument of rationalism. The argument and the problem it addresses have a long history, from the ancient world right up to the present." "The Achilles of Rationalist Psychology consists of newly written papers addressing each of the main contributors to the discussion of the Achilles. Despite the historical importance and intrinsic interest of the argument, very little has been written about it. This volume should therefore be of use to advanced undergraduates, graduate students, and researchers across the domains of philosophy, history, and cognitive science."--Jacket.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references and index.

Description based on print version record.
Table of contents: title: Front Matter; Did Plato Articulate the Achilles Argument?; Aristotle on the Unity of Consciousness; The Neoplatonic Achilles; The Unity of the Soul and Contrary Appetites in Medieval Philosophy; Hume, Spinoza and the Achilles Inference; Locke and the Achilles Argument; The Reverse Achilles in Locke; Cudworth and Bayle: An Odd Couple?; The Achilles Argument and the Nature of Matter in the Clarke Collins Correspondence; Leibniz's 'Achilles'; Hume's Reply to the Achilles Argument; Kant and Mendelssohn on the Implications of the 'I Think'; Kant on the Achilles Argument