{"id":1194,"date":"2021-04-11T23:52:40","date_gmt":"2021-04-11T22:52:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/?p=1194"},"modified":"2021-04-11T23:52:40","modified_gmt":"2021-04-11T22:52:40","slug":"seminar-series-in-analytic-philosophy-2020-21-session-20","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/seminar-series-in-analytic-philosophy-2020-21-session-20\/","title":{"rendered":"Seminar Series in Analytic Philosophy 2020-21, Session 20"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Interpreting Groups<br \/>\n<\/strong>J. Robert G. Williams (University of Leeds)<\/p>\n<p>16 April 2021, 16:00 (Lisbon Time \u2013 GMT+1) | Online, via Zoom<\/p>\n<p><strong>Abstract:<\/strong> Some theories of content entail that an entity cannot be a believer\/desirer without being a chooser\/perceiver. This includes my version of radical interpretation, on\u00a0which the correct belief-desire interpretation of an agent is that interpretation which best rationalizes their choices given their evidence. But (I\u2019ll argue) group agents can be believers and desirers, without the group as a whole making choices, and without\u00a0the group as a whole having any analogue of a perceptual state. Rather than give up on my favourite theory of content or denying group attitudes, I explore a generalization. Drawing on Plantinga\u2019s proper-functionalism theory of warrant, I\u2019ll characterize a\u00a0radical-interpretation schema in which the choice-evidence-centric version I developed in previous work is just one special case. I\u2019ll draw out connections to related proposals for group thinking by List and Pettit, and Tollefsen.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Free Attendance, but preregistration required:<\/strong>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/registration\/\">https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/registration\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Interpreting Groups J. Robert G. Williams (University of Leeds) 16 April 2021, 16:00 (Lisbon Time \u2013 GMT+1) | Online, via Zoom Abstract: Some theories of content entail that an entity cannot be a believer\/desirer without being a chooser\/perceiver. This includes my version of radical interpretation, on\u00a0which the correct belief-desire interpretation of an agent is that [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1194","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1194","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1194"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1194\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1195,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1194\/revisions\/1195"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1194"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1194"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.demiurgos.eu\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1194"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}