Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Jeffrey H. Sicha, Wilhelm Dilthey and Zoltn Gendler Szab

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


9 ideas

1. Philosophy / H. Continental Philosophy / 3. Hermeneutics
The claim of hermeneutics to give knowledge through understanding is challenged by positivism [Mautner on Dilthey]
     Full Idea: The claim of hermeneutics to give understanding instead of explanation can be seen as part of the theory of knowledge, but it seems to be incompatible with the most accepted aspects of positivism.
     From: comment on Wilhelm Dilthey (works [1883]) by Thomas Mautner - Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy p.248
     A reaction: So much the worse for positivism. The same conflict occurs in modern philosophy of mind. God can be a positivist if he likes, but we must settle for hermeneutics for a lot of our knowledge. We are discussing method, not ontology.
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 3. Types of Set / c. Unit (Singleton) Sets
What is a singleton set, if a set is meant to be a collection of objects? [Szabó]
     Full Idea: The relationship between an object and its singleton is puzzling. Our intuitive conception of a set is a collection of objects - what are we to make of a collection of a single object?
     From: Zoltán Gendler Szabó (Nominalism [2003], 4.1)
     A reaction: The ontological problem seems to be the same as that of the empty set, and indeed the claim that a pair of entities is three things. For logicians the empty set is as real as a pet dog, but not for me.
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 3. Nature of Numbers / d. Natural numbers
The essence of natural numbers must reflect all the functions they perform [Sicha]
     Full Idea: What is really essential to being a natural number is what is common to the natural numbers in all the functions they perform.
     From: Jeffrey H. Sicha (Counting and the Natural Numbers [1968], 2)
     A reaction: I could try using natural numbers as insults. 'You despicable seven!' 'How dare you!' I actually agree. The question about functions is always 'what is it about this thing that enables it to perform this function'.
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 4. Using Numbers / c. Counting procedure
To know how many, you need a numerical quantifier, as well as equinumerosity [Sicha]
     Full Idea: A knowledge of 'how many' cannot be inferred from the equinumerosity of two collections; a numerical quantifier statement is needed.
     From: Jeffrey H. Sicha (Counting and the Natural Numbers [1968], 3)
Counting puts an initial segment of a serial ordering 1-1 with some other entities [Sicha]
     Full Idea: Counting is the activity of putting an initial segment of a serially ordered string in 1-1 correspondence with some other collection of entities.
     From: Jeffrey H. Sicha (Counting and the Natural Numbers [1968], 2)
7. Existence / C. Structure of Existence / 7. Abstract/Concrete / a. Abstract/concrete
Abstract entities don't depend on their concrete entities ...but maybe on the totality of concrete things [Szabó]
     Full Idea: It is better not to include in the definition of abstract entities that they ontologically depend on their concrete correlates. Note: ..but they may depend on the totality of concreta; maybe 'the supervenience of the abstract' is part of ordinary thought.
     From: Zoltán Gendler Szabó (Nominalism [2003], 2.2)
     A reaction: [the quoted phrase is from Gideon Rosen] It certainly seems unlikely that the concept of the perfect hexagon depends on a perfect hexagon having existed. Human minds have intervened between the concrete and the abstract.
14. Science / D. Explanation / 1. Explanation / d. Explaining people
Natural science seeks explanation; human sciences seek understanding [Dilthey, by Mautner]
     Full Idea: In the natural sciences we seek for causes and ask for explanation (erklären), but in the human or cultural sciences we seek understanding (verstehen) by means of interpretation.
     From: report of Wilhelm Dilthey (works [1883]) by Thomas Mautner - Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy p.144
     A reaction: This seems a nice distinction. The prospects of finding the causes or explanations of Shakespeare's plays don't look good, and when you have explained the causes of a chemical reaction you probably have all you need.
15. Nature of Minds / C. Capacities of Minds / 3. Abstraction by mind
Geometrical circles cannot identify a circular paint patch, presumably because they lack something [Szabó]
     Full Idea: The vocabulary of geometry is sufficient to identify the circle, but could not be used to identify any circular paint patch. The reason must be that the circle lacks certain properties that can distinguish paint patches from one another.
     From: Zoltán Gendler Szabó (Nominalism [2003], 2.2)
     A reaction: I take this to be support for the traditional view, that abstractions are created by omitting some of the properties of physical objects. I take them to be fictional creations, reified by language, and not actual hidden entities that have been observed.
18. Thought / E. Abstraction / 5. Abstracta by Negation
Abstractions are imperceptible, non-causal, and non-spatiotemporal (the third explaining the others) [Szabó]
     Full Idea: In current discussions, abstract entities are usually distinguished as 1) in principle imperceptible, 2) incapable of causal interaction, 3) not located in space-time. The first is often explained by the second, which is in turn explained by the third.
     From: Zoltán Gendler Szabó (Nominalism [2003], 2.2)
     A reaction: Szabó concludes by offering 3 as the sole criterion of abstraction. As Lewis points out, the Way of Negation for defining abstracta doesn't tell us very much. Courage may be non-spatiotemporal, but what about Alexander the Great's courage?