<!DOCTYPE html><HTML lang="en"> <head><meta charset="utf-8"> <title>Snowdon (Paul) - Conclusions and Consequences (Theo Todman's Book Collection - Paper Abstracts) </title> <link href="../../TheosStyle.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"><link rel="shortcut icon" href="../../TT_ICO.png" /></head> <BODY> <CENTER> <div id="header"><HR><h1>Theo Todman's Web Page - Paper Abstracts</h1><HR></div><A name="Top"></A> <TABLE class = "Bridge" WIDTH=950> <tr><th><A HREF = "../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_21/PaperSummary_21013.htm">Conclusions and Consequences</A></th></tr> <tr><th><A HREF = "../../Authors/S/Author_Snowdon (Paul).htm">Snowdon (Paul)</a></th></tr> <tr><th>Source: Snowdon (Paul) - Persons, Animals, Ourselves - Chapter 12</th></tr> <tr><th>Paper - Abstract</th></tr> </TABLE> </CENTER> <P><CENTER><TABLE class = "Bridge" WIDTH=600><tr><td><A HREF = "../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_21/PaperSummary_21013.htm">Paper Summary</A></td><td><A HREF = "../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_21/PaperCitings_21013.htm">Books / Papers Citing this Paper</A></td><td><A HREF="#ColourConventions">Text Colour-Conventions</a></td></tr></TABLE></CENTER></P> <hr><P><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><u>Author s Introduction</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>I have been arguing that there are no grounds for supposing that you and the animal where you are can or could have come apart. No solid case has been made to think that such dissociations represent possibilities. One loose end to which I wish to attend in this chapter is that nothing critical has so far been said about possible objections to (A) which are <em>not</em> based on dissociations. </li><li>In Chapter 1 it was argued that there may be such objections. Can anything be said about this possibility? Now, I do not see any general proof that there could not be a sound argument of this type. It is a matter of considering candidates. </li><li>I want, therefore, to proceed in a piecemeal way by scrutinizing, in the first section of this chapter, some examples of such arguments which have been put forward by Professor Baker in her book <a name="3"></a>"<A HREF = "../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_00/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_66.htm">Baker (Lynne Rudder) - Persons and Bodies: A Constitution View</A>". In the course of this scrutiny I hope that some more general points might emerge, or at least might indicate themselves. </li></ol></FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Some Non-Dissociation Arguments</li><li><a name="1"></a><A HREF="../../Notes/Notes_8/Notes_872.htm">Too Many Thinkers</A><SUP>1</SUP></li><li>Consequences</li><li><b>Conclusion</b>: <ul type="disc"><li>I have no desire at this point to repeat or summarize the arguments I have proposed. I do not think of what has been presented here as anything approaching the last word about <a name="2"></a><A HREF="../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_24.htm">animalism</A><SUP>2</SUP>, its significance, or the grounds for it or against it. We are at an early stage in the exploration of the way of thinking of ourselves as animals, a way that became peripheral in the English-speaking philosophical tradition after Locke. It is not to be expected that the full resources of this approach have emerged so far in the course of its rediscovery over the last thirty years. </li><li>My aim has been to present a conception of the debate formed in response to the modes of argument that have been popular in a certain tradition of discussion. I hope, at least, to have altered somewhat the perception of the power of that tradition. The denial that we are animals I see as one example of what might be called the 'bewitchment of our intelligence' by philosophy, and my hope is, in some small way, to have combated that. </li></ul></li></ol></FONT><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR></P><a name="ColourConventions"></a><p><b>Text Colour Conventions (see <A HREF="../../Notes/Notes_10/Notes_1025.htm">disclaimer</a>)</b></p><OL TYPE="1"><LI><FONT COLOR = "0000FF">Blue</FONT>: Text by me; &copy; Theo Todman, 2018</li><LI><FONT COLOR = "800080">Mauve</FONT>: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); &copy; the author(s)</li></OL> <BR><HR><BR><CENTER> <TABLE class = "Bridge" WIDTH=950> <TR><TD WIDTH="30%">&copy; Theo Todman, June 2007 - August 2018.</TD> <TD WIDTH="40%">Please address any comments on this page to <A HREF="mailto:theo@theotodman.com">theo@theotodman.com</A>.</TD> <TD WIDTH="30%">File output: <time datetime="2018-08-02T09:30" pubdate>02/08/2018 09:30:20</time> <br><A HREF="../../Notes/Notes_10/Notes_1010.htm">Website Maintenance Dashboard</A></TD></TR> <TD WIDTH="30%"><A HREF="#Top">Return to Top of this Page</A></TD> <TD WIDTH="40%"><A HREF="../../Notes/Notes_11/Notes_1140.htm">Return to Theo Todman's Philosophy Page</A></TD> <TD WIDTH="30%"><A HREF="../../index.htm">Return to Theo Todman's Home Page</A></TD> </TR></TABLE></CENTER><HR> </BODY> </HTML>