000			03427nam a22005415i 4500
001			978-1-4020-6893-5
003			DE-He213
005			20160302163354.0
007			cr nn 008mamaa
008			100301s2008 ne | s |||| 0|eng d
020			_a9781402068935 _9978-1-4020-6893-5
024	7		_a10.1007/978-1-4020-6893-5 _2doi
050		4	_aB53
072		7	_aHPM _2bicssc
072		7	_aPHI015000 _2bisacsh
082	0	4	_a128.2 _223
245	1	4	_aThe Achilles of Rationalist Psychology _h[electronic resource] / _cedited by Thomas M. Lennon, Robert J. Stainton.
264		1	_aDordrecht : _bSpringer Netherlands, _c2008.
300			_aX, 290 p. _bonline resource.
336			_atext _btxt _2rdacontent
337			_acomputer _bc _2rdamedia
338			_aonline resource _bcr _2rdacarrier
347			_atext file _bPDF _2rda
490	1		_aStudies in the History of Philosophy of Mind ; _v7
505	0		_aDid 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 -- William James and the Achilles Argument -- The Binding Problem: Achilles in the 21st Century.
520			_aHow 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.
650		0	_aPhilosophy.
650		0	_aHistory.
650		0	_aScience.
650		0	_aPhilosophy of mind.
650		0	_aPsychology.
650	1	4	_aPhilosophy.
650	2	4	_aPhilosophy of Mind.
650	2	4	_aHistory of Philosophy.
650	2	4	_aPhilosophy, general.
650	2	4	_aHistory of Science.
650	2	4	_aScience, general.
650	2	4	_aPsychology, general.
700	1		_aLennon, Thomas M. _eeditor.
700	1		_aStainton, Robert J. _eeditor.
710	2		_aSpringerLink (Online service)
773	0		_tSpringer eBooks
776	0	8	_iPrinted edition: _z9781402068928
830		0	_aStudies in the History of Philosophy of Mind ; _v7
856	4	0	_uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6893-5
912			_aZDB-2-SHU
999			_c180802 _d180802