Davidson’s argument for the claim that animals cannot be credited with beliefs rests on the assumption that possessing beliefs—as propositional attitudes—presupposes the possession of language. Based on Roskies’ reconstruction of Davidson’s argument, I want to discuss the implications of overemphasizing the role of language in thinking. I will offer a (tentative) explanation as to why this overemphasis occurs, namely due to a preoccupation with the way we experience ourselves while thinking or “having thoughts”; I further attempt to defend why a bottom-up strategy for the investigation of thought-invoking mechanisms might be a more promising way to study thought and the role of language therein.
Beliefs | Concept of belief | Davidson | Human cognition | Language | Mental representations, | Metacognition | Non-linguistic creatures | Propositional attitudes | Thought