Talk:Internalism and externalism: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:05, 13 February 2002

These need to be moved to internalism and externalism (epistemology), internalism and externalism (philosophy of language, etc. (note, isms are not capitalized in philosophical writing, generally speaking).

Actually, though, I think there should be separate articles for each: internalism (epistemology), etc. I don't think it matters very much whether the meat of the discussion of debates between internalists and externalists of various stripes should go, whether on an "i and e" page jointly, or instead separately--but I do think we should have separate articles in any case. --Larry_Sanger

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+These need to be moved to [[internalism and externalism (epistemology)]], [[internalism and externalism (philosophy of language]], etc. (note, isms are not capitalized in philosophical writing, generally speaking).
-I don't have any idea which philosophical topic should get top billing on this page.  I think the epistemological sense is the newest, and the moral sense is the oldest, and I know very little about the debate in philosophy of mind.  The other scale we could use is how popular the terms are in these disciplines, but I have no idea how to determine ''that'' information.  So, the current arrangement is arbitrary, and if you have a good reason for changing it, go right ahead.  [[MRC]]
+Actually, though, I think there should be separate articles for each: [[internalism (epistemology)]], etc.  I don't think it matters ''very'' much whether the meat of the discussion of debates between internalists and externalists of various stripes should go, whether on an "i and e" page jointly, or instead separately--but I do think we should have separate articles in ''any'' case. --[[user:Larry_Sanger|Larry_Sanger]]