Customer Reviews

Representation and Reality (Representation and Mind)

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

"Representation and Reality" is very much a work by the "later Putnam", a guy who, for better or worse, is nowhere near as influential in the philosophy of mind as the "middle Putnam" was, the Putnam of the 1960s and 1970s. Some of the views presented here are sort of interesting as you go through them, but I find that nothing by the later Putnam ever ends up really staying with me or substantially altering my picture of things. It's pleasant enough to read, but the experience is surprisingly junk-foodish (to the extent this is possible in analytic philosophy). Bottom line: if you're interested in the career trajectory of perhaps the greatest living American philosopher or in hearing some wide-ranging objections to certain central elements of contemporary philosophy of mind, this may be the book for you. However, "Representation and Reality" has neither been unfluential enough nor is it convincing enough for me to recommend it highly.

After reading Chomsky and Fodor's work on language for the past few years, I found this book to be a breath of fresh air. His arguments are sophisticated, but his writing is clear and commonsensical. Being relatively new to philosophy, I found he was easier to understand than Jerry Fodor. For those interested in language and mind I definitely recommend this book.

In Representation and Reality, Putnam begins with Aristotle's definition of "mental", Quine's idea of the corporate nature of theories, and weaves a philosophic record that is stunningly reminiscent of Martha Stewart's new handbook of hors d'oeurves. Yes, the jig is up: what Putnam is really after here is to define what exactly makes a good cream puff and his argument is complete with a lemma that weighs the pros and cons of custard vs. whipped cream filling. Modern analytic philosophy is really a boring topic and one isn't surprised that Putnam really avoids such issues as whether or not language is a game with rules or really a television program that will soon be cancelled if ratings don't go up. This is what Putnam sees as the influence of the environment on the meaning of words and the the meaning of "meaning" (it's not spoiling the plot to tell you that "meaning" is also a word that is used in the English language; however, when I've asked people who only speak Mandarin Chinese if they know the meaning of "meaning", they usually just give me a blank look. Obviously this is a topic that needs to be ironed out). Yet, it isn't until the last chapter that Putman throws down the gauntlet, spills the beans, and reveals that his whole philosophic endeavor, or journey, is one vast voyage to discover the perfect guacamole dip (his idea of adding Ketalar as well as lime will no doubt raise a few eyebrows, but, let me assure you, I've mixed up a batch and it's very tasty). Finally, his critique of Fodor, while well-intentioned, is sure to remain incomprehesible to the vast majority of nonphilosophers who are certain that their brain is really a soft substance inside their skull that thinks and is conscious, and is not, as Fodor argues, a pilfered pack of cigarettes deftly taken from a fast food store when the clerk wasn't looking. While you need to know a lot about contemporary analytic philosophy to understand this book, you need to know very little of this same subject to leave it alone. Brilliant!