Click here and press the right key for the next slide (or swipe left)
also ...
Press the left key to go backwards (or swipe right)
Press n to toggle whether notes are shown (or add '?notes' to the url before the #)
Press m or double tap to slide thumbnails (menu)
Press ? at any time to show the keyboard shortcuts
Could interacting interpreters be in a position to know things which they would be unable to know if they were manifestly passive observers?
Step 1: Which obstacle to knowledge?
Step 2: How?
Obstacle: opaque means impair goal ascription
e.g. pram -> bus; gorilla preparing nettles
e.g. tool use
‘an action can be explained by a goal state if, and only if, it is seen as the most justifiable action towards that goal state that is available within the constraints of reality’
Csibra & Gergely (1998, 255)
1. action a is directed to some goal;
2. actions of a’s type are normally means of realising outcomes of G’s type;
3. no available alternative action is a significantly better* means of realising outcome G;
4. the occurrence of outcome G is desirable;
5. there is no other outcome, G′, the occurrence of which would be at least comparably desirable and where (2) and (3) both hold of G′ and a
Therefore:
6. G is a goal to which action a is directed.
Obstacle: opaque means impair goal ascription
e.g. pram -> bus; gorilla preparing nettles
e.g. tool use
e.g. communicative actions
Could interacting interpreters be in a position to know things which they would be unable to know if they were manifestly passive observers?
Step 1: Which obstacle to knowledge?
Step 2: How?