ABSTRACT

Rodriguez provides an excellent general summary of Pieces of Mind as well as a graphical depiction of the decision tree behind the options I canvas for how to interpret psychological predicates across human and nonhuman domains. I respond to his two main objections: that the argument from analogy isn’t strong enough to support Literalism, and that there is a promising non-Literalist alternative that I haven’t refuted. Rodriguez also raises important semantic issues that I don’t address in the book, but which should gain more philosophical attention going forward.

中文翻译：

---

超越认知领域中的人类标准，答复“超越人类领域的认知”（Angel Rodriguez对“ Ops of Mind OUP 2018”的评论）

摘要

罗德里格斯（Rodriguez）提供了一份出色的《精神碎片》的概述，并以图形方式描述了我在如何解释人类和非人类领域的心理谓词的选择背后的决策树。我回应他的两个主要反对意见：类推的论点不足以支持文学主义，还有我没有反驳的有希望的非文学主义替代方案。罗德里格斯（Rodriguez）还提出了我在书中未解决的重要语义问题，但今后应该引起更多的哲学关注。