Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Adam Smith, Roy Ellen and Daniel M. Mittag

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these philosophers


12 ideas

7. Existence / E. Categories / 1. Categories
Monothetic categories have fixed defining features, and polythetic categories do not [Ellen]
     Full Idea: Many categories are 'monothetic' (the defining set of features is always unique), and others are 'polythetic' (single features being neither essential to group membership nor sufficient to allocate an item to a group).
     From: Roy Ellen (Anthropological Studies of Classification [1996], p.33)
     A reaction: This seems a rather important distinction which hasn't made its way into philosophy, where there is a horrible tendency to oversimplify, with the dream of a neat and unified picture. But see Goodman's 'Imperfect Community' problem (Idea 7957).
In symbolic classification, the categories are linked to rules [Ellen]
     Full Idea: Symbolic classification occurs when we use some things as a means of saying something about other things. ..They enhance the significance of some categories, so that categories imply rules and rules imply categories.
     From: Roy Ellen (Anthropological Studies of Classification [1996], p.35)
     A reaction: I'm afraid the anthropologists seem to have more of interest to say about categories than philosophers do. Though maybe we couldn't do anthropology if philosophers had made us more self-conscious about categories. Teamwork!
7. Existence / E. Categories / 2. Categorisation
Several words may label a category; one word can name several categories; some categories lack words [Ellen]
     Full Idea: Words are not always a good guide to the existence of categories: there may be several words which label the same categories (synonyms). and the same word can be used for quite different ideas. Some categories may exist without being labelled.
     From: Roy Ellen (Categories, Classification, Cogn. Anthropology [2006], I)
     A reaction: This is the sort of point which seems obvious to anyone outside philosophy, but which philosophers seem to find difficult to accept. Philosophers should pay much more attention to animals, and to illiterate peoples. Varieties of rice can lack labels.
7. Existence / E. Categories / 5. Category Anti-Realism
Continuous experience sometimes needs imposition of boundaries to create categories [Ellen]
     Full Idea: Because parts of our experience of the world are complexly continuous, it is occasionally necessary to impose boundaries to produce categories at all.
     From: Roy Ellen (Anthropological Studies of Classification [1996], p.33)
     A reaction: I like it. Ellen says that people tend to universally cut nature somewhere around the joints, but we can't cope with large things, so the sea tends to be labelled in sections, even though most of the world's seas are continuous.
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 3. Evidentialism / b. Evidentialism
We could know the evidence for our belief without knowing why it is such evidence [Mittag]
     Full Idea: While one might understand the proposition entailed by one's evidence, one might have no idea how or why one's evidence entails it. This seems to imply one is not justified in believing the proposition on the basis of one's evidence.
     From: Daniel M. Mittag (Evidentialism [2011], 'Evidential')
     A reaction: An example might be seen if a layman tours a physics lab. This looks like a serious problem for evidentialism. Once you see why the evidence entails the proposition, you are getting closer to understanding than to knowledge. Explanation.
Evidentialism can't explain that we accept knowledge claims if the evidence is forgotten [Mittag]
     Full Idea: If one came to believe p with good evidence, but has since forgotten that evidence, we might think one can continue to believe justifiably, but evidentialism appears unable to account for this.
     From: Daniel M. Mittag (Evidentialism [2011], 'Forgotten')
     A reaction: We would still think that the evidence was important, and we would need to trust the knower's claim that the forgotten evidence was good. So it doesn't seem to destroy the evidentialist thesis.
Evidentialism concerns the evidence for the proposition, not for someone to believe it [Mittag]
     Full Idea: Evidentialism is not a theory about when one's believing is justified; it is a theory about what makes one justified in believing a proposition. It is a thesis regarding 'propositional justification', not 'doxastic justification'.
     From: Daniel M. Mittag (Evidentialism [2011], 'Preliminary')
     A reaction: Thus it is entirely about whether the evidence supports the proposition, and has no interest in who believes it or why. Knowledge is when you believe a true proposition which has good support. This could be internalist or externalist?
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 5. Coherentism / c. Coherentism critique
Coherence theories struggle with the role of experience [Mittag]
     Full Idea: Traditional coherence theories seem unable to account for the role experience plays in justification.
     From: Daniel M. Mittag (Evidentialism [2011], 'Evidence')
     A reaction: I'm inclined to say that experience only becomes a justification when it has taken propositional (though not necessarily lingistic) form. That is, when you see it 'as' something. Uninterpreted shape and colour can justify virtually nothing.
13. Knowledge Criteria / E. Relativism / 4. Cultural relativism
Classification is no longer held to be rooted in social institutions [Ellen]
     Full Idea: The view that all classification finds its roots in social institutions is now generally considered untenable.
     From: Roy Ellen (Anthropological Studies of Classification [1996], p.36)
     A reaction: And about time too. Ellen (an anthropologist) inevitably emphasises the complexity of the situation, but endorses the idea that people everywhere largely cut nature at the joints.
22. Metaethics / C. The Good / 1. Goodness / i. Moral luck
A carelessly thrown brick is condemned much more if it hits someone [Smith,A, by Harman]
     Full Idea: Adam Smith wrote about the influence of fortune on moral judgements, giving nice examples. Someone carelessly throws a brick over a wall. His companion may complain even if no harm is done. But if the brick hits someone much greater condemnation ensues.
     From: report of Adam Smith (The Theory of Moral Sentiments [1759]) by Gilbert Harman - Moral Philosophy meets social psychology 10.7.1.2
     A reaction: This appears to be the earliest observation of the phenomenon of moral luck, though Plato (Idea 269) endorsed the view that the luck of outcome should be taken into account in moral judgements.
23. Ethics / B. Contract Ethics / 1. Contractarianism
People prepare our dinner from their own self-interest, not from humanity [Smith,A]
     Full Idea: It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love.
     From: Adam Smith (The Wealth of Nations [1776], p.26-7), quoted by Amartya Sen - The Idea of Justice 08 'Narrowing'
     A reaction: Sen passionately pleads that this not be taken out of context. It is about the motivation for the relationship of exchange, and not about morality in general, which also includes trust etc. The subsequent lines in Smith show this.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 11. Capitalism
Selfish profit-seeking increases collective wealth, so greed is good, and egoism is altruism [Smith,A, by Harari]
     Full Idea: Smith's claim that the selfish human urge to increase private profits is the basis for collective wealth is one of the most revolutionary ideas in human history. …Greed is good …and egoism is altruism.
     From: report of Adam Smith (The Wealth of Nations [1776]) by Yuval Noah Harari - Sapiens: brief history of humankind 16 'Growing'
     A reaction: The central confrontation of political philosophy still seems to be Adam Smith v Karl Marx. Why can't there be altruistic non-greedy profit-seeking? Not 'I want profits' but 'we want profits'. Altruistic capitalists aim to create jobs.