The Primacy of Communication

Abstract

As an important aspect of “the principle of charity,” Donald Davidson insists that the possession of thoughts cannot be separated from the interpretation of their contents. This claim is based on the triangulation model of communication, which combines semantic externalism with the argument against private language. On this model, it is argued that a grasp of the concept of objective truth is a prerequisite for possessing thoughts, and that it is only possible to acquire the concept through a particular historical context of interacting with other interpreters and the external world.
On the other hand, Stephen Stich thinks that the conceptual resource for having mental states can be more varied than Davidson describes. In order to show this, Stich postulates a map called “the causal/functional interpretation function” which connects mental states with their truth conditions. He emphasizes that the map is a product of historical contingency, and thus explains why there can be an intellectual space filled with alternative concepts that cannot be given semantic interpretations.
Thus, Davidson and Stich agree that the mind is the product of some historical contexts, but make different evaluations of their significance. In my view, Stich's argument does not give sufficient attention to the historical nature of the mind. It merely suggests that the mental domain can exist without the concept of truth, and remains silent about how the historical contexts underlie the emergence of the domain. However, as Davidson suggests, the mental features produced in a particular historical context of triangulation are fundamental to the concept of mind, and hence they cannot be eliminated without changing the subject. I shall argue that it is in this sense that communication is primal for the existence of the mind.