Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Hermarchus, Micklethwait,J/Wooldridge,A and Koen Vervloesem

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


7 ideas

4. Formal Logic / D. Modal Logic ML / 7. Barcan Formula
Barcan:nothing comes into existence; Converse:nothing goes out; Both:domain is unchanging [Vervloesem]
     Full Idea: Intuitively, the Barcan formula says that nothing comes into existence when moving from a possible world to an alternative world. The converse says that nothing goes out of existence. Together they say the domain of quantification is fixed for all worlds.
     From: Koen Vervloesem (Barcan Formulae [2010])
     A reaction: Stated so clearly, they sound absurd. The sensible idea, I suppose, is that you can refer to all the things from any world, but that doesn't mean they are possible. Shades of Meinong. 'Square circles' are not possible.
5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 5. First-Order Logic
Classical liberalism seeks freedom of opinion, of private life, of expression, and of property [Micklethwait/Wooldridge]
     Full Idea: The classical liberals agreed on a basic list of freedoms: of opinion (including religion), of private life, of expression, and of property
     From: Micklethwait,J/Wooldridge,A (The Fourth Revolution [2014], 9)
     A reaction: Mill is main articulator of this. Modern neo-liberals focus on economic freedom. Neither of them seem to make freedom of opportunity central, though I suspect our modern Liberal Party would.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 8. Socialism
The welfare state aims at freedom from want, and equality of opportunity [Micklethwait/Wooldridge]
     Full Idea: In the classical liberal tradition freedom meant freedom from external control, and equality meant equality before the law. In the welfare state (of Beatrice Webb) freedom was reinterpreted as freedom from want, and equality as equality of opportunity.
     From: Micklethwait,J/Wooldridge,A (The Fourth Revolution [2014], 3)
     A reaction: The authors call this the 'third revolution' in government, after 17th century centralisation and early 19th century accountability. Tawney 1931 is the key text.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 9. Communism
For communists history is driven by the proletariat [Micklethwait/Wooldridge]
     Full Idea: For the communists the proletariat rather than the state was the locomotive of history.
     From: Micklethwait,J/Wooldridge,A (The Fourth Revolution [2014], 3)
     A reaction: I feel increasingly reluctant to support any party which appears to mainly represent the interests of a single social class, no matter how large that class may be. An attraction of liberalism is that it makes no reference to class.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 11. Capitalism
Fans of economic freedom claim that capitalism is self-correcting [Micklethwait/Wooldridge]
     Full Idea: The central laissez-faire conceit is that capitalism is a self-correcting mechanism.
     From: Micklethwait,J/Wooldridge,A (The Fourth Revolution [2014], 3)
     A reaction: This was Keynes's rather left-wing criticism of standard capitalist views. These resurfaced in the 1980s with mantras about the virtues of 'market forces'.
25. Social Practice / C. Rights / 4. Property rights
Roman law entrenched property rights [Micklethwait/Wooldridge]
     Full Idea: Roman law entrenched property rights.
     From: Micklethwait,J/Wooldridge,A (The Fourth Revolution [2014], 1 Intro)
     A reaction: Normally attributed to Locke, so this is a good corrective. Was the principle gradually forgotten before Locke?
25. Social Practice / F. Life Issues / 6. Animal Rights
Animals are dangerous and nourishing, and can't form contracts of justice [Hermarchus, by Sedley]
     Full Idea: Hermarchus said that animal killing is justified by considerations of human safety and nourishment and by animals' inability to form contractual relations of justice with us.
     From: report of Hermarchus (fragments/reports [c.270 BCE]) by David A. Sedley - Hermarchus
     A reaction: Could the last argument be used to justify torturing animals? Or could we eat a human who was too brain-damaged to form contracts?