Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-ntvhh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-25T18:09:52.135Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

How to understand beliefs

Review products

Commentary onAlisonCopnik (1993) How we know our minds: The illusion of first-person knowledge of intentionality. BBS 16:1–14.

Commentary onAlvin I.Goldman (1993) The psychology of folk psychology. BBS 16:15–28.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2010

Alison Gopnik
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720. gopnik@cnsa.berkeley.edu

Abstract

In this response various possible objections to the critique of first-person-authority in Gopnik (1993), are considered. The heart of all three objections is that “beliefs” and other notions of commonsense psychology should not be construed as attempts to describe the functional character of our minds. Rather, they are 1) an evolutionarily determined technique for dealing with our conspecifics (Bogdan) or 2) the result of interpretation (Van Brakel) or 3) self-constitutive entities which exist only when we have the concept of their existence (Greve and Buchner). While the word belief might be construed in all these ways, they do not correspond either to the construals of our commonsense psychology or of a scientific psychology.

Information

Type
Authors' Response
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable