display all the ideas for this combination of philosophers
4 ideas
12568 | God assures me of the existence of external things [Locke] |
Full Idea: God has given me assurance enough of the existence of things without me. | |
From: John Locke (Essay Conc Human Understanding (2nd Ed) [1694], 4.11.03) | |
A reaction: Is Locke committing a similar crime to Descartes? Descartes was circular about what is 'clear and distinct'. Locke uses inner existence to prove God, who is then rich enough at act as guarantor for what is external. Not circular. Over-reaching. |
12516 | Obscure simple ideas result from poor senses, brief impressions, or poor memory [Locke] |
Full Idea: The cause of obscurity in simple ideas seems to be either dull organs, or very slight and transient impressions made by the objects, or else a weakness in memory, not able to retain them as received. | |
From: John Locke (Essay Conc Human Understanding (2nd Ed) [1694], 2.29.03) | |
A reaction: This seems to give some support to the epistemological view of vagueness, with the implication that if our senses and memory were perfect, then our ideas would have perfect clarity. |
12517 | Ideas are uncertain when they are unnamed, because too close to other ideas [Locke] |
Full Idea: A source of confusion is when any complex idea is made up of too small a number of simple ideas, and such only as are common to other things, whereby the differences that make it deserve a different name are left out. | |
From: John Locke (Essay Conc Human Understanding (2nd Ed) [1694], 2.29.07) | |
A reaction: In other words, a word covers a variety of entities, and so it cannot possibly pinpoint any of them exactly. Cats all differ, but so do small and large circles. |
9116 | Vague words have hidden boundaries [Sorensen] |
Full Idea: Vague words have hidden boundaries. The subtraction of a single grain of sand might turn a heap into a non-heap. | |
From: Roy Sorensen (Vagueness and Contradiction [2001], Intro) | |
A reaction: The first sentence could be the slogan for the epistemic view of vagueness. The opposite view is Sainsbury's - that vague words are those which do not have any boundaries. Sorensen admits his view is highly counterintuitive. I think I prefer Sainsbury. |