Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for H.Putnam/P.Oppenheim, Benjamin Lee Whorf and Theophrastus

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


7 ideas

13. Knowledge Criteria / E. Relativism / 5. Language Relativism
Language arranges sensory experience to form a world-order [Whorf]
     Full Idea: Language first of all is a classification and arrangement of the stream of sensory experience which results in a certain world-order.
     From: Benjamin Lee Whorf (Punctual and segmentive Hopi verbs [1936], p.55)
     A reaction: This is only true to a limited degree. See Davidson's 'On the very idea of a conceptual scheme'. All humans share a world-order, to some extent.
Hopi consistently prefers verbs and events to nouns and things [Whorf]
     Full Idea: Hopi, with its preference for verbs, as contrasted to our own liking for nouns, perpetually turns our propositions about things into propositions about events.
     From: Benjamin Lee Whorf (An American Indian model of the Universe [1936], p.63)
     A reaction: This should provoke careful thought about ontology - without concluding that it is entirely relative to language.
13. Knowledge Criteria / E. Relativism / 6. Relativism Critique
How can we state relativism of sweet and sour, if they have no determinate nature? [Theophrastus]
     Full Idea: How could what is bitter for us be sweet and sour for others, if there is not some determinate nature for them?
     From: Theophrastus (On the Senses [c.321 BCE], 70)
     A reaction: The remark is aimed at Democritus. This is part of the general question of how you can even talk about relativism, without attaching stable meanings to the concepts employed.
14. Science / B. Scientific Theories / 4. Paradigm
Scientific thought is essentially a specialised part of Indo-European languages [Whorf]
     Full Idea: What we call "scientific thought" is a specialisation of the western Indo-European type of language.
     From: Benjamin Lee Whorf (An American Indian model of the Universe [1936], p.246)
     A reaction: This is the beginnings of an absurd extreme relativist view of science, based on a confusion about meaning and thought.
14. Science / D. Explanation / 2. Types of Explanation / j. Explanations by reduction
Six reduction levels: groups, lives, cells, molecules, atoms, particles [Putnam/Oppenheim, by Watson]
     Full Idea: There are six 'reductive levels' in science: social groups, (multicellular) living things, cells, molecules, atoms, and elementary particles.
     From: report of H.Putnam/P.Oppenheim (Unity of Science as a Working Hypothesis [1958]) by Peter Watson - Convergence 10 'Intro'
     A reaction: I have the impression that fields are seen as more fundamental that elementary particles. What is the status of the 'laws' that are supposed to govern these things? What is the status of space and time within this picture?
26. Natural Theory / A. Speculations on Nature / 2. Natural Purpose / c. Purpose denied
Theophrastus doubted whether nature could be explained teleologically [Theophrastus, by Gottschalk]
     Full Idea: Theophrastus questioned Aristotle's teaching on the extent to which teleological explanations could be applied to the natural world.
     From: report of Theophrastus (On Metaphysics (frags) [c.320 BCE]) by H.B. Gottschalk - Aristotelianism
     A reaction: It is interesting to see that Aristotle's own immediate successor had doubts about teleology. We usually assume that the ancients were teleological, and this was rejected in the seventeenth century (e.g. Idea 4826).
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 2. Passage of Time / e. Tensed (A) series
The Hopi have no concept of time as something flowing from past to future [Whorf]
     Full Idea: A Hopi has no general notion or intuition of time as a smooth flowing continuum in which everything in the universe proceeds at an equal rate, out of a future, through a present, into a past.
     From: Benjamin Lee Whorf (An American Indian model of the Universe [1936], p.57)
     A reaction: If true, this would not so much support relativism of language as the view that that conception of time is actually false.