Comparing Tyler Burge's Reason And The First Person

An integral part of philosophy, and the philosophy of mind, is the study of epistemology. Each of the philosophers studied this term have varying approaches of the study of knowledge. Tyler Burge is no different in this circumstance. In Reason and the First Person, Burge does not clearly state what his idea of knowledge is, nor does he provide much of his opinions on the importance of knowledge. A large part of Burge’s ideas of epistemology are shaped by the philosophy of the mind, and the idea that knowledge develops concepts of knowledge of the first person, and reasoning. Burge focuses on these points as expressions of distinctive capacities of the human mind. This paper will outline the argument and conclusion of Burge’s Reason and the …show more content…
Burge makes it clear that a good portion of our personal beliefs can possibly be supported or negated, and it is fundamentally those beliefs that drive our character. Similar to Lichtenberg, who says that rather than saying “I am thinking, therefore I exist”, Descartes should have said “thinking is occurring”. This is because we should not assume that there is a person, or being, that is thinking, but rather there is a person somewhere with the ability to think. As Burge is of the belief that human beings are able to recall and draw on resources to understand a specific idea or attitude, he would be in agreement with Lichtenberg. It is on page five, that Burge …show more content…
Tyler Burge argues that the one who possesses the first person concept is the only one who is capable of fully articulating a priori concepts of reasoning. In order to fully understand the concept of reason, a person must be completely motivated by reasons, which allow them to shape, modify or validate their personal beliefs. The first‐person concept allows a person to identify their rational behaviours and attitudes as his or her personal beliefs. The general idea of self-knowledge is that there is an immediate a priori warrant, versus the knowledge of other’s minds, which can be disputed, as it is based on observation. These points, and other important facts are argued in Tyler Burge’s paper, alongside his epistemological views of how we, as human beings, are aware of both the mind of other’s, as well as our own minds. Though he does not completely articulate his ideas of understanding, and how it is we come to understand different facts, Burge brings forth compelling ideas, which may very well hold some valid