著者

榊原 英輔

出版者

科学基礎論学会

雑誌

科学基礎論研究 (ISSN:00227668)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.44, no.1-2, pp.55-75, 2017 (Released:2017-09-07)

参考文献数

62

被引用文献数

1

---

The concept of mental illness has been challenged by various parties and with various background concerns. In this paper, I will discuss how mental illness is defined, as far as it is considered as a title to special treatment. The essentialism about mental illness insists that mental illness is distinguished from other harmful human conditions by some scientific criteria. Three essentialistic theories―physical lesion, biological disadvantage,and evolutionary dysfunction theories―are reviewed, and it is shown that they all fail to appropriately distinguish illness from normality. I will alternatively defend the anti-essentialism about mental illness,which characterize mental illness as harmful human conditions that are best treated by psychiatric professionals.

著者

榊原 英輔

出版者

The Philosophy of Science Society, Japan

雑誌

科学哲学 (ISSN:02893428)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.53, no.1, pp.89-102, 2020-09-30 (Released:2020-09-30)

参考文献数

19

---

This is a review essay on Kohji Ishihara's Philosophy of Mental Disorder: From Classification to Dialogue. The book is a collection of Ishihara's recent works. Part Ⅰ of the book discusses the history of psychiatry that originally excluded those with mental disorders from the dialogue on psychiatry. Part Ⅱ describes the ever-changing nature of the classification of mental disorders. In Part Ⅲ, he presents what he calls the “dialogical approach” to mental disorders as a promising alternative way of doing psychiatry. The structure and subtitle of the book convey the message that the practice of classifying mental disorders will be superseded by the dialogue with those with mental disorders in the future. Contrary to this message, based on the notion of epistemic injustice proposed by Fricker, I argue that the classification of mental disorders has both merits and demerits for those whose disorders are thus classified, and that the classification of mental disorders will continue to assume the role of the starting point of such dialogue in the future.

著者

榊原 英輔

出版者

星和書店

雑誌

精神科治療学 (ISSN:09121862)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.33, no.2, pp.207-212, 2018-02

著者

榊原 英輔

出版者

科学基礎論学会

雑誌

科学基礎論研究 (ISSN:00227668)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.45, no.1-2, pp.69-70, 2018 (Released:2018-05-07)

著者

榊原 英輔

出版者

The Philosophy of Science Society, Japan

雑誌

科学哲学 (ISSN:02893428)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.49, no.2, pp.49-65, 2016-12-20 (Released:2017-09-29)

参考文献数

13

---

Previous discussion of skepticism about meaning as it appears in Kripke's Wittgenstein has not provided complete examples of an alternative interpretation of a language. Sakakibara recently gave an instance of a nonstandard interpretation of algebra called interpretation Q. The present paper compares interpretation Q and the standard interpretation C of algebra in three respects: complexity of meaning, engagement with reality, and convenience of use. Although both interpretations are equal in complexity and engage with reality properly, interpretation C is superior to interpretation Q because interpretation C alone allows digit-by-digit calculations, which justifies our asserting that interpretation C is the correct one. Since this way of reasoning does not make mention of the linguistic community we belong to, the present case study suggests that the link between language and community is not necessary.

著者

榊原 英輔

出版者

The Philosophy of Science Society, Japan

雑誌

科学哲学 (ISSN:02893428)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.43, no.1, pp.1_1-1_14, 2010 (Released:2010-09-26)

参考文献数

12

---

D.Davidson argued that shared conventions learned in advance are not essential for the success of communication. In this paper, holding the validity of his contention in suspense, I argue that linguistic conventions play essential roles when communication fails. In everyday communication, when discrepancies are detected between what the speaker intended to inform the hearer and what the hearer actually understood, it becomes necessary to determine whether the speaker or the hearer caused the communication failure. For in everyday communication, the hearer often changes her position based on her misunderstanding about the intention of the speaker, and it is sometimes too late when the hearer realizes the speaker's true intention. In such cases, it is necessary to determine who is responsible for the hearer's loss. What the speaker said, which is determined by linguistic conventions, arbitrates the conflict between them. From the fact that shared conventions mainly relate to the evaluation aspect of communication, it follows that the speaker and the hearer need not learn shared linguistic conventions in advance of the conversation, and have only to learn them later, when failures are detected among past communication.