Mostrar mensagens com a etiqueta Filosofia Analítica. Mostrar todas as mensagens
Mostrar mensagens com a etiqueta Filosofia Analítica. Mostrar todas as mensagens

2 de março de 2014

Susan Carey (Harvard University): Petrus Hispanus Lectures 2014

Universidade de Lisboa
LanCog - Language, Mind and Cognition Research Group 
Compêndio em Linha de Problemas de Filosofia Analítica
PTDC/FIL-FIL/121209/2010

Petrus Hispanus Lectures 2014
Susan Carey (Harvard University)
Lecture I. The Origin of Concepts: Natural Number
27 May 2014, 11:00
Faculty of Letters, University of Lisbon
Abstract: Alone among animals, humans can ponder the causes and cures of pancreatic cancer or global warming. How are we to account for the human capacity to create concepts such as electron, cancer, infinity, galaxy, and democracy? A theory of conceptual development must have three components. First, it must characterize the innate representational repertoire—that is, the representations that subsequent learning processes utilize. Second, it must describe how the initial stock of representations differs from the adult conceptual system. Third, it must characterize the learning mechanisms that achieve the transformation of the initial into the final state. I defend three theses. With respect to the initial state, contrary to historically important thinkers such as the British empiricists, Quine, and Piaget, as well as many contemporary scientists, the innate stock of primitives is not limited to sensory, perceptual or sensory-motor representations; rather, there are also innate conceptual representations. With respect to developmental change, contrary to “continuity theorists” such as Fodor, Pinker, Macnamara and others, conceptual development involves qualitative change, resulting in systems of representation that are more powerful than and sometimes incommensurable with those from which they are built. With respect to a learning mechanism that achieves conceptual discontinuity, I offer Quinian bootstrapping. I take on two of Fodor's challenges to cognitive science: 1) I show how (and in what ways) learning can lead to increases in expressive power and 2) I show how to defeat mad dog concept nativism. I challenge Fodor's claims that all learning is hypothesis testing, and that the only way new concepts can be constructed is by assembling them from developmental primitives, using the combinatorial machinery of the syntax of the language of thought. These points are illustrated through a case study of the origin of representations of natural number.

Lecture II. The Origin of Concepts: Logical connectives and abstract relations
29 May 2014, 15:00
Faculty of Psychology, University of Lisbon
Abstract: In lecture I I argue for innate domain specific systems of representations, systems of core cognition, illustrating with two such systems with numerical content. Systems of core cognition are perception like in many ways: the format of representation is most likely iconic, and entity identification is supported by innate perceptual analyzers. The existence of systems of core cognition, so specified, does not preclude the existence of innate representations with different properties. Here I consider what form innate support for logic might take. Logical connectives (or, not…) and symbols for abstract relations (e.g., same) are not likely to be iconic in format nor perception like in any way. At issue is whether non-linguistic animals, and/or prelinguistic human infants, have a logic-like, language-like, Language of Thought, capable of propositional representations formulated over discrete arbitrary symbols. I will present the progress we have made on addressing this question around two case studies: reasoning according to the disjunctive syllogism (A or B, not A, therefore B) and representations of the abstract relations same and different.


Free Admission

The Petrus Hispanus Lectures are delivered every other academic year at the University of Lisbon by a leading figure in current research about the nature of  mind, cognition and language. Previous Petrus Hispanus Lecturers: Hilary Putnam, Daniel Dennett, Richard Jeffrey, Ned Block, David Kaplan, Tyler Burge, Timothy Williamson.

Sponsors: Faculdade de Psicologia da UL, Faculdade de Letras da UL, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia

--
LanCog Research Group
Centro de Filosofia
Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa
Alameda da Universidade
Lisboa
1600-214
Portugal

4 de dezembro de 2013

Célia Teixeira: The a priori and the analytic: the traditional connection


Centro de Filosofia da Universidade de Lisboa
LanCog Group (Language, Mind and Cognition Research Group)
http://www.lancog.com/

LANCOG SEMINAR
2013-14: Session 7

The a priori and the analytic: the traditional connection
Célia Teixeira
University of Lisbon

6 de Dezembro de 2013, 15:00
Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa
Sala Mattos Romão (departamento de Filosofia)

Abstract: The aim of this talk is to evaluate and criticise the account according to which a priori knowledge is mere knowledge of analytic truths. This account is based on two major claims:

(The Traditional Connection – TC) A priori knowledge is mere knowledge of analytic truths.
(The Explanatory Thesis – ET) We can explain the a priori with the notion of analyticity.

Depending on how we understand the notion of analyticity, (TC) and (ET) will get different readings. There are two main readings of the notion of analyticity: a metaphysical reading and an epistemological reading. I will argue that under the metaphysical reading, even if (TC) is true, (ET) is false. But we have well known reasons to doubt the intelligibility of the metaphysical reading of the notion of analyticity – and with it the intelligibility of both (TC) and (ET). I will then turn my attention to the epistemological reading of the notion of analyticity. I will argue that under this reading it is also the case that if (TC) is true, (ET) is false. I will then argue, contrary to current orthodoxy, that (TC) is false under the epistemological reading. If I am right, and both (TC) and (ET) are false under both readings of the notion of analyticity, we have good reasons to question the philosophical significance and the very tenability of the analytic/synthetic distinction.

ALL WELCOME!

--
LanCog Research Group
www.lancog.com
Centro de Filosofia
Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa
Alameda da Universidade
Lisboa
1600-214
Portugal

27 de novembro de 2013

Anna Marmodoro: Aristotle on the Problem of Common Sensibles

SEMINAR SERIES IN ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY
2013-14: Session 2

Aristotle on the Problem of Common Sensibles 
Anna Marmodoro
University of Oxford

29 November 2013, 15:00
Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa
Sala Mattos Romão (departamento de Filosofia)

Abstract: Aristotle draws a distinction between qualities that are perceptible via a single sense only, the special sensibles, and qualities that are perceptible via more than one sense at once, the common sensibles. Why is this distinction important to Aristotle and how does he justify it?  What are the ontology and the epistemology of the common sensibles, in light of Aristotle’s assumption that each sense organ is sensitive to only its own special sensibles? Does the problem of how the common sensibles get perceived give us reasons for giving up a ‘separatist’ view of sense experiences? Or rather can it be solved by postulating extra perceptual powers for the senses? Are more ‘parsimonious’ options viable? In this paper I engage with these and related questions, which have attracted the interest of Aristotelian scholars (Gregoric 2007, Johansen 2012) and philosophers of the mind (Tye 2007) alike. I offer my own reading of Aristotle’s account and examine its philosophical viability.

ALL WELCOME!

Centro de Filosofia da Universidade de Lisboa
LanCog Group (Language, Mind and Cognition Research Group)
http://www.lancog.com/
Project Online Companion PTDC/FIL-FIL/121209/2010

13 de maio de 2013

Ontologia da Arte: Criatividade e Bom Senso

SEMINAR SERIES IN ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY
2012-13: Session 12

Ontologia da Arte: Criatividade e Bom Senso
António Lopes (Universidade de Lisboa, LanCog Group)

17 de Maio de 2013, 15:00
Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa
Sala Mattos Romão (departamento de Filosofia)

Resumo: Que tipo de coisa é Macbeth? Se dois compositores escrevem duas partituras exactamente iguais sem o saberem, quantas obras temos? Se um poeta concebe um soneto e é atropelado fatalmente antes de o escrever, existe ou existiu um poema?
Ao longo das últimas décadas, filósofos da arte e metafísicos têm apresentado perspectivas extremamente diversas, originais e surpreendentes sobre o problema de saber quais as categorias metafísicas em que melhor se encaixam as diferentes obras de arte. A profusão de teorias neste campo não só cobre a quase totalidade das categorias geralmente discutidas, como a transborda. A inovação em ontologia da arte parece querer espelhar a criatividade do seu objecto.
Traçarei uma panorâmica das principais teorias ontológicas hoje discutidas, como preparação para a discussão de algumas questões meta-ontológicas e metodológicas cada vez mais na ordem do dia. Deve uma ontologia da arte descrever as concepções metafísicas constitutivas implícitas no discurso e prática artísticos, ou regimentá-las? Poderão estar erradas as crenças fundamentais dessa prática acerca da natureza dos artefactos que cria e com os quais lida? A partir de que limites uma teoria deixa de ser revisionista para passar a falhar o objecto que devia analisar?
Como pano de fundo estará uma sugestão: se as questões de apreciação e valor têm a primazia na filosofia da arte, a metafísica em sentido estrito é esteticamente inerte, mesmo que isso não lhe retire o fascínio.


ALL WELCOME!

Centro de Filosofia da Universidade de Lisboa
LanCog Group (Language, Mind and Cognition Research Group)
http://www.lancog.com/
Project Online Companion PTDC/FIL-FIL/121209/2010
Instituto Filosófico de Pedro Hispano, Departamento de Filosofia da UL

12 de dezembro de 2012

Counterfactual Abduction and the Inference to the Best Explanation

14th December 2012, 15:00
Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa, Sala Mattos Romão (Departamento de Filosofia)


Counterfactual Abduction and the Inference to the Best Explanation
Moritz Schulz (Logos Group, University of Barcelona)
Abstract: Counterfactuals give rise to a kind of inference 
(counterfactual abduction) strikingly similar to what is usually called the inference to the best explanation. On the other hand, counterfactuals seem to play a major role in inferences to the best explanation. This suggests that the two kinds of inferences could be accounted for in a unified way. I will argue that both types of inferences can be seen as a certain kind of exclusion argument which starts with a simple disjunction of hypotheses (in the case of counterfactual abduction) or with a disjunction of potential explanations (in the case of the inference to the best explanation) and then proceeds in counterfactual terms. As a result, it will turn out that both types of abduction owe their evidential import to the availability of a corresponding deductive argument. In the form of a slogan: abduction is just a special kind of deduction.

20 de outubro de 2012

Metaphysical Knowledge



SEMINAR SERIES IN ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY

2012-13: Session 1

Metaphysical Knowledge

E.J. Lowe (Durham University)

26 October 2012, 15:00

Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa
Sala Mattos Romão (departamento de Filosofia)


Abstract: My topic in this paper is metaphysical knowledge, by which I
mean knowledge of metaphysical truths. And my principal questions are
whether, and if so how, such knowledge is attainable by creatures like
ourselves. I shall argue that we can and do possess metaphysical
knowledge. But, of course, how controversial this claim is deemed to
be will depend on what one takes to be distinctive of metaphysical
truths. Consequently, I must first offer some account of what I take
to be the nature of metaphysics as an intellectual discipline. It will
soon be seen that on my account of the nature of metaphysics, the
claim that we can and do possess metaphysical knowledge is indeed a
controversial one and consequently one whose defence may prove
interesting. But in offering this account and defending this claim, I
have a deeper motive. This is to promote a certain conception of the
methodology of metaphysics which is regrettably still very much in
abeyance, largely on account of the dominance of first epistemology
and then the philosophy of language in the western philosophical
tradition of the last three hundred years. The slogan for my preferred
conception of metaphysical method might well be this: metaphysics must
be done directly. What I am opposing is the view — so widespread that
it often goes unspoken — that metaphysics, to the extent that it can
be done at all, has to be done through the medium of some other branch
of philosophy, such as epistemology, logic, philosophical semantics or
the philosophy of mind. What is particularly absurd about this view is
that each of these branches of philosophy has, inevitably, certain
distinctively metaphysical commitments which cannot possibly be
warranted by doing metaphysics in the way that the view recommends.
All that sustains the view in the face of this absurdity, as far as I
can see, is the unspoken conviction of so many philosophers that
metaphysics cannot be done, as I put it, ‘directly’. I think we owe
this pernicious conviction in large measure to the ‘modernist’ legacy
of Descartes, Hume, and Kant — great philosophers all of them, but all
philosophers whose work contributed to the demotion of metaphysics
from its central role in philosophy. It has been encouraging to see
evidence of a revival in the fortunes of metaphysics in recent years,
but contemporary metaphysics is still a tender plant that needs much
nurturing and one that is constantly in danger of reverting to the
degenerate type propagated by the modernist legacy.

Free Attendance

Sponsored by: Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, Faculdade de
Letras da Universidade de Lisboa

18 de abril de 2012

Timothy Williamson: Logic, Science, and Metaphysics


























PETRUS HISPANUS LECTURES 2012

TIMOTHY WILLIAMSON
Wykeham Professor of Logic
University of Oxford

LOGIC, SCIENCE, AND METAPHYSICS

5 and 6 June 2012, 11:00
Faculty of Letters, University of Lisbon
Room: Anfiteatro 4

Lecture 1: Logics as Scientific Theories
The similarities between logic and other branches of science are
usually underestimated. Like other scientific theories, logics can be
compared and assessed abductively in terms of their simplicity,
strength, elegance, and consistency with what is already known.
Tarski’s definition of logical truth provides a suitable standard of
correctness for them to aim at. Such an account can avoid the
objectionable features of Quine’s holism.

Lecture 2: Modal Logic as Metaphysics
The second lecture is a case study of the methodology described in the
first, applied to modal logic with a metaphysical interpretation of
the modal operators. Some consequences will be drawn out for possible
worlds model theory and the question of whether there could have been
things that do not actually exist. The relevance of higher-order modal
logic for these issues will also be explained.

The Petrus Hispanus Lectures are delivered every other academic year
at the University of Lisbon by a leading figure in current research
about the nature of mind, cognition and language. Previous Petrus
Hispanus Lecturers: Hilary Putnam, Daniel Dennett, Richard Jeffrey,
Ned Block, David Kaplan, Tyler Burge.


2 de março de 2012

Coordination and Disagreement across Perspectives























Coordination and Disagreement across Perspectives

Workshop

Lisbon, 10-12 September 2012


The problem of coordination (and lack thereof) across perspectives manifests itself in many guises: in communication, lying and misleading, in agreements and disagreements, in shared worlds and group actions, and in competition.

This networking event brings together researchers from three collaborative research projects (CCCOM, DRUST and NormCon) within the EUROCORES EuroUnderstanding Programme.

The workshop will be organized by the LanCog Group of the Philosophy Centre of the University of Lisbon.

It will be integrated with a graduate workshop (OFA8), locally organized by early career researchers. There will be 6 slots for graduate students, or researchers who have obtained their PhDs within the last 2 years, to present their work. A call for abstracts is now underway.


http://coordinationdisagreement.weebly.com/index.html

Oficina de Filosofia Analítica 8























Graduate Workshop - Oficina de Filosofia Analítica 8


The Oficina de Filosofia Analítica -- OFA is a graduate workshop that has been co-organized by the Portuguese Philosophy Society (SPF) and the Portuguese Society for Analytic Philosophy (SPFA) until now. This is the first time that the workshop is organized by the LanCog group, although still with the support of both societies.


It is also the first time that an international call for abstracts will be made.
This edition of OFA, its eight, is particularly special, as it is integrated in the workshop Coordination and Disagreement across Perspectives -- a networking activity of the EUROCORES EuroUnderstanding Programme. We believe that this will provide a good opportunity for graduate students and recent post-docs to participate in the EuroUnderstanding workshop, and for the senior researchers to attend the graduate workshop.

There will be 6 slots for graduate students, or researchers who have obtained their PhDs within the last 2 years, to present their work.
Call for abstracts!!!


This call for abstracts is directed at graduate students and researchers who have obtained their PhDs within the last 2 years. All submitted abstracts must be in English or Portuguese, and must be on philosophy with no further restrictions as regards topics or areas. Final papers will be presented at the workshop (30 minutes) followed by a commentary (10 minutes) and an open discussion (35 minutes). There are two ways of participating in the workshop, as a speaker or as a commentator.



Contributed papers

Authors should send an abstract of 1500 words (where the thesis defended and the arguments backing them up should be clearly stated) to < ofa8workshop AT gmail.com >. Abstracts should be arranged for blind refereeing. Information about authors should be indicated on a separate title page including title of the paper, author’s full name, e-mail address and affiliation. The selection will be carried out by the members of our scientific committee. Authors may also express their interest to participate as commentators.



Commentators

Those interested in participating as commentators should send their data (name, e- mail address, affiliation and a short CV) to < ofa8workshop AT gmail.com >. A description of the main areas of philosophy they are interested in will also be required.



Deadlines

Submitted abstracts will be accepted until the 30th of April 2012. The result of the selection process will be communicated to the authors by the end of June 2012. Speakers must send the final version of their papers before the 30th of July 2012.



Funding

Meals (lunch, coffee breaks and one social dinner) are covered for speakers at OFA8. We have a small budget to help cover accommodation costs. Speakers must pay for their travel expenses themselves.



Scientific Committee

João Branquinho (University of Lisbon)

Daniel Cohnitz (University of Tartu)

Esa Diaz-Leon (University of Manitoba)

Sören Häggqvist (University of Stockholm)

Jussi Haukijoa (Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim)

Dan López de Sa (ICREA and University of Barcelona)

Teresa Marques (University of Lisbon)

Peter Pagin (University of Stockholm)

Stefano Predelli (University of Nottingham)

Sonia Roca (University of Stirling)

Sven Rosenkranz (ICREA and University of Barcelona)

Adriana Silva Graça (University of Lisbon)

Pedro Santos (University of Algarve)

Ricardo Santos (University of Évora)

Andreas Stokke (CSMN, University of Oslo)

Isidora Stojanovic (Institut Jean Nicod, Paris)

Célia Teixeira (University of Lisbon)

Josefa Toribio (ICREA and Autonomous University of Barcelona)

Åsa Wikforss (University of Stockholm)


Sponsors

LANCOG (http://www.lancog.com/)

Faculty of Letters, University of Lisbon (http://www.fl.ul.pt/)

Portuguese Philosophy Society (http://www.spfil.pt/)

OFA takes place under the auspices of the Portuguese Society for Analytic Philosophy.

European Science Foundation, EUROCORES Programme EuroUnderstanding, (funds from FWF, FWO, DCIR, ETF, CNR, NWO, RCN, MNiSW, FCT, VR).

http://coordinationdisagreement.weebly.com/ofa8.html

1 de julho de 2010

1ª Oficina Anual do LanCog


Clique na imagem para ver melhor.


A 1.ª Oficina Anual do Grupo LanCog do CFUL realiza-se nos próximos dias 7, 8 e 9 de Julho na Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa (Anfiteatro IV). Entrada livre.

17 de abril de 2010

Hartry Field em Letras















April 26
Sala Mattos Romão (departamento de Filosofia), 16:00
Hartry Field (New York University)

Is there a problem about revising Logic?
How, if at all, can one rationally change which logic one employs? I'll reply both to those who think we can't and to those who minimize the problems of doing so, and suggest a model for how such rational change might occur. I'll connect the discussion with a real example: the issues surrounding what I take to be a serious though not incontrovertible case for logical revision.

Manuel García-Carpintero em Letras






















Mini-Course: Truth and Reference in Fiction

Manuel Garcia-Carpintero (Universidade de Barcelona, LOGOS Group)

14, 21 e 28 de Maio de 2010, 16:00
Sala Mattos Romão (Departamento de Filosofia)

More than fifty years ago, Quine brought back the de re/de dicto distinction that Medieval Philosophers had already made to the attention of the philosophical community. Through its impact on the debate confronting direct vs. descriptivist accounts of reference started by Barcan Marcus, Donnellan, Kaplan and of course Saul Kripke in the following decade, the nature of de re or singular thoughts became one of the leading concerns of contemporary philosophers. As perhaps we should expect, in spite of extended discussion we are far from having a generally accepted philosophical account; some philosophers defend more or less strict version of "acquaintance" accounts, on which an epistemic condition is placed on the posibility of singular thoughts, while others defend "acquaintanceless" or "latitudinarian" views, on which pure descriptive access to the res may suffice. In this mini-course, I will examine the impact on the matter of the semantics of fictional discourse. I will discuss the behaviour of intuitively empty and non-empty referential expressions, proper names, indexicals, and definite descriptions, mostly in two specific and related sort of cases: the use of those expressions by the creator of a fiction, while putting forward the speech acts which, I will argue, are constitutive of that activity; and critical discourse of fictions aimed at getting their contents right. The issue of the nature of reference in those discourses is intimately related with the issue of the nature of "truth in fiction": whether or not 'London', as used in Orwell's "1984" refers to the actual city (in the same way it does when we use it in making assertions about the UK capital) is intimately related with the issue whether we need to invoke truths about London in determining what is "true" in Orwel''s fiction, and also with the issue whether we can derive actual truths about the UK capital from what is "true" in Orwell's fiction. The ultimate point of my discussion for the more general question of the nature of singular thought is to argue that those cases provide indirect evidence supporting an epistemic account of those thoughts.

Entrada livre

30 de maio de 2009

Fourth Meeting of the Portuguese Society for Analytic Philosophy



António Lopes, Pedro Galvão e Teresa Marques, investigadores do CFUL, organizam o quarto encontro da Sociedade Portuguesa de Filosofia Analítica. Para mais informações, clicar AQUI.

2 de maio de 2009

Stephen Mumford em Letras



Stephen Mumford, Professor da Universidade de Nottingham, fará uma conferência no Seminário de Filosofia Analítica (sessão nº4), no próximo dia 8 de Maio, às 16h, na Sala Mattos Romão da FLUL. O tema da intervenção será o seguinte: "Modelling Causes as Vectors"

"Abstract: Causal transactions are standardly modelled in neuron diagrams, which are presented as a philosophically neutral way of representing what happens when one thing causes another. It is argued in this paper that neuron diagrams are a theory-laden representation of causation and that the commitments contained are questionable. Instead, a vector model of causation is introduced and developed that shows better the complexity that can be involved in causation. Among other things, the model will allow us to see a solution to the problem of causation by absence."

Entrada livre.

25 de abril de 2009

Conferência de Peter Lamarque



"On Bringing a Work into Existence"
Peter Lamarque
(University of York)

15 de Maio, pelas 18:00
Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa, Sala Matos Romão (Departamento de Filosofia)

Abstract:
The paper considers works (of art) of all kinds—paintings, prints, symphonies, songs, poems, novels, dramas, films, architectural works, sculptures, dance, etc.—and asks what change is wrought on the world when such works are brought into existence. Three suggestions are canvassed and assessed: (a) a work comes into existence when the manipulation of an artistic medium is completed; (b) a work comes into existence when a certain constituting material (a physical object, an abstract type, etc) acquires intentional and relational properties that previously it didn’t possess; (c) when a work comes into existence a new kind of entity is created. According to (a) work creation consists only in the reconfiguring of preexisting materials; according to (b) work creation consists in the preexisting materials acquiring a new property, specifically a status property (e.g. being a work, being a sculpture); it is only according to the third suggestion (c) that genuine creation occurs, in the sense of a new entity being brought into existence. Reasons are given for preferring (c) over (a) and (b) and further elaboration is offered by way of characterizing and defending (c).


15 de Maio, pelas 18:00 Local: Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa, Sala Matos Romão (Departamento de Filosofia)

17 de março de 2009

Cláudio Costa: "Revendo a Teoria Descritivista dos Nomes Próprios"

Para lá da conferência do dia 27 de Março, o Professor Cláudio Costa (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte) fará uma exposição sobre o tema: "Revendo a Teoria Descritivista dos Nomes Próprios" no dia 24 de Março, 14h30.
(Aula de Filosofia da Linguagem, Mente e Cognição Programa de Mestrado/Doutoramento em Ciência Cognitiva da UL)

Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa
Sala Matos Romão (Depto de Filosofia)

Resumo: A aula tem como objetivo apresentar uma versão alternativa da teoria descritivista dos nomes próprios. Nessa versão, uma necessária conexão causal dos nomes próprios com referência, quando esta última existe, não é negada. Mas a explicação da referência através de conteúdos intencionais geralmente exprimíveis através de feixes de descrições é retomada, sob o suposto de que deve haver uma regra de ordem superior, capaz de organizar as descrições constituintes dos feixes, estabelecendo as descrições relevantes e como elas precisam ser satisfeitas para que os nomes próprios possam ser admitidos como tendo referência. Uma vez que essa regra seja satisfatoriamente estabelecida, certos fenômenos, como a rigidez dos nomes próprios e a falta de rigidez de suas descrições co-referenciais parecem se tornar capazes de receber uma nova explicação.

Entrada Livre

Apoio: Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia
Centro de Filosofia da Universidade de Lisboa LanCog Group (Language, Mind and Cognition Research Group) Instituto Filosófico de Pedro Hispano, Departamento de Filosofia da UL