|
4901
|
Truth has to be correspondence to facts, and a match between relations of ideas and relations in the world [Perry]
|
|
Full Idea:
I think knowledge and truth are a matter of correspondence to facts, despite all the energy spent showing the naïveté of this view. The connections of our ideas in our heads correspond to relations in the outside world.
|
|
From:
John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §8.1)
|
|
A reaction:
Yes. Modern books offer the difficulties of defining 'correspondence', and finding an independent account of 'facts', as conclusive objections, but I say a brain is a truth machine, and it had better be useful. Indefinability doesn't nullify concepts.
|
|
17807
|
To study formal systems, look at the whole thing, and not just how it is constructed in steps [Curry]
|
|
Full Idea:
In the study of formal systems we do not confine ourselves to the derivation of elementary propositions step by step. Rather we take the system, defined by its primitive frame, as datum, and then study it by any means at our command.
|
|
From:
Haskell B. Curry (Remarks on the definition and nature of mathematics [1954], 'The formalist')
|
|
A reaction:
This is what may potentially lead to an essentialist view of such things. Focusing on bricks gives formalism, focusing on buildings gives essentialism.
|
|
17806
|
It is untenable that mathematics is general physical truths, because it needs infinity [Curry]
|
|
Full Idea:
According to realism, mathematical propositions express the most general properties of our physical environment. This is the primitive view of mathematics, yet on account of the essential role played by infinity in mathematics, it is untenable today.
|
|
From:
Haskell B. Curry (Remarks on the definition and nature of mathematics [1954], 'The problem')
|
|
A reaction:
I resist this view, because Curry's view seems to imply a mad metaphysics. Hilbert resisted the role of the infinite in essential mathematics. If the physical world includes its possibilities, that might do the job. Hellman on structuralism?
|
|
16554
|
Activities have place, rate, duration, entities, properties, modes, direction, polarity, energy and range [Machamer/Darden/Craver]
|
|
Full Idea:
Activities can be identified spatiotemporally, and individuated by rate, duration, and types of entity and property that engage in them. They also have modes of operation, directionality, polarity, energy requirements and a range.
|
|
From:
Machamer,P/Darden,L/Craver,C (Thinking About Mechanisms [2000], 3)
|
|
A reaction:
This is their attempt at making 'activity' one of the two central concepts of ontology, along with 'entity'. A helpful analysis. It just seems to be one way of slicing the cake.
|
|
4885
|
Identity is a very weak relation, which doesn't require interdefinability, or shared properties [Perry]
|
|
Full Idea:
The truth of "a=b" doesn't require much of 'a' and 'b' other than that there is a single thing to which they both refer. They needn't be interdefinable, or have supervenient properties. In this sense, identity is a very weak relation.
|
|
From:
John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §1.2)
|
|
A reaction:
Interesting. This is seeing the epistemological aspects of identity. Ontologically, identity must invoke Leibniz's Law, and is the ultimately powerful 'relation'. A given student, and the cause of a crop circle, may APPEAR to be quite different.
|
|
4899
|
Possible worlds thinking has clarified the logic of modality, but is problematic in epistemology [Perry]
|
|
Full Idea:
Using possible worlds to model truth-conditions of statements has led to considerable clarity about the logic of modality. Attempts to use the system for epistemic purposes, however, have been plagued by problems.
|
|
From:
John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §8.1)
|
|
A reaction:
Presumably what lurks behind this is a distinction between what is logically or naturally possible, and what appears to be possible from the perspective of a conscious mind. Is there a possible world in which I can fly?
|
|
4898
|
Possible worlds are indices for a language, or concrete realities, or abstract possibilities [Perry]
|
|
Full Idea:
Possible worlds can be thought of as indices for models of the language in question, or as concrete realities (David Lewis), or as abstract ways the world might be (Robert Stalnaker), or in various other ways.
|
|
From:
John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §8.1)
|
|
A reaction:
I strongly favour the Stalnaker route here. Reducing great metaphysics to mere language I find abhorrent, and I suspect that Lewis was trapped by his commitment to strong empiricism. We must embrace abstractions into our ontology.
|
|
16562
|
We understand something by presenting its low-level entities and activities [Machamer/Darden/Craver]
|
|
Full Idea:
The intelligibility of a phenomenon consists in the mechanisms being portrayed in terms of a field's bottom out entities and activities.
|
|
From:
Machamer,P/Darden,L/Craver,C (Thinking About Mechanisms [2000], 7)
|
|
A reaction:
In other words, we understand complex things by reducing them to things we do understand. It would, though, be illuminating to see a nest of interconnected activities, even if we understood none of them.
|
|
16555
|
Functions are not properties of objects, they are activities contributing to mechanisms [Machamer/Darden/Craver]
|
|
Full Idea:
It is common to speak of functions as properties 'had by' entities, …but they should rather be understood in terms of the activities by virtue of which entities contribute to the workings of a mechanism.
|
|
From:
Machamer,P/Darden,L/Craver,C (Thinking About Mechanisms [2000], 3)
|
|
A reaction:
I'm certainly quite passionately in favour of cutting down on describing the world almost entirely in terms of entities which have properties. An 'activity', though, is a bit of an elusive concept.
|
|
16528
|
Mechanisms are not just push-pull systems [Machamer/Darden/Craver]
|
|
Full Idea:
One should not think of mechanisms as exclusively mechanical (push-pull) systems.
|
|
From:
Machamer,P/Darden,L/Craver,C (Thinking About Mechanisms [2000], 1)
|
|
A reaction:
The difficulty seems to be that you could broaden the concept of 'mechanism' indefinitely, so that it covered history, mathematics, populations, cultural change, and even mathematics. Where to stop?
|
|
16553
|
Our account of mechanism combines both entities and activities [Machamer/Darden/Craver]
|
|
Full Idea:
We emphasise the activities in mechanisms. This is explicitly dualist. Substantivalists speak of entities with dispositions to act. Process ontologists reify activities and try to reduce entities to processes. We try to capture both intuitions.
|
|
From:
Machamer,P/Darden,L/Craver,C (Thinking About Mechanisms [2000], 3)
|
|
A reaction:
[A quotation of selected fragments] The problem here seems to be the raising of an 'activity' to a central role in ontology, when it doesn't seem to be primitive, and will typically be analysed in a variety of ways.
|
|
16559
|
Descriptions of explanatory mechanisms have a bottom level, where going further is irrelevant [Machamer/Darden/Craver]
|
|
Full Idea:
Nested hierachical descriptions of mechanisms typically bottom out in lowest level mechanisms. …Bottoming out is relative …the explanation comes to an end, and description of lower-level mechanisms would be irrelevant.
|
|
From:
Machamer,P/Darden,L/Craver,C (Thinking About Mechanisms [2000], 5.1)
|
|
A reaction:
This seems to me exactly the right story about mechanism, and it is a story I am associating with essentialism. The relevance is ties to understanding. The lower level is either fully understood, or totally baffling.
|
|
16564
|
There are four types of bottom-level activities which will explain phenomena [Machamer/Darden/Craver]
|
|
Full Idea:
There are four bottom-out kinds of activities: geometrico-mechanical, electro-chemical, electro-magnetic and energetic. These are abstract means of production that can be fruitfully applied in particular cases to explain phenomena.
|
|
From:
Machamer,P/Darden,L/Craver,C (Thinking About Mechanisms [2000], 7)
|
|
A reaction:
I like that. It gives a nice core for a metaphysics for physicalists. I suspect that 'mechanical' can be reduced to something else, and that 'energetic' will disappear in the final story.
|
|
4891
|
If epiphenomenalism just says mental events are effects but not causes, it is consistent with physicalism [Perry]
|
|
Full Idea:
Epiphenomenalism is usually considered to be a form of dualism, but if we define it as the doctrine that conscious events are effects but not causes, it appears to be consistent with physicalism.
|
|
From:
John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §4.2)
|
|
A reaction:
Interesting. The theory was invented to put mind outside physics, and make the closure of physics possible. However, being capable of causing things seems to be a necessary condition for physical objects. An effect in one domain is a cause in another.
|
|
16391
|
Indexical thoughts are about themselves, and ascribe properties to themselves [Perry, by Recanati]
|
|
Full Idea:
Perry's newer token-reflexive framework says indexical thoughts have token-reflexive content, that is, thoughts that are about themselves and ascribe properties to themselves. …They relate not to the subject, but to the occurrence of a thought.
|
|
From:
report of John Perry (Reference and Reflexivity [2001]) by François Recanati - Mental Files 18.1
|
|
A reaction:
[There seem to be four indexical theories: this one, Recanati's, the earlier Kaplan-Perry one, and Lewis's] Is Perry thinking of second-level thoughts? 'I'm bored' has the content 'boredom' plus 'felt in here'? How does 'I'm bored' refer to 'I'm bored'?
|
|
4889
|
Although we may classify ideas by content, we individuate them differently, as their content can change [Perry]
|
|
Full Idea:
Although we classify ideas by content for many purposes, we do not individuate them by content. The content of an idea can change.
|
|
From:
John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §3.2)
|
|
A reaction:
As the compiler of this database, I find this very appealing. The mind works exactly like a database. I have a 'file' (Perry's word) marked "London", the content of which undergoes continual change. I am a database management system.
|
|
4896
|
The intension of an expression is a function from possible worlds to an appropriate extension [Perry]
|
|
Full Idea:
In possible-worlds semantics, expressions have intensions, which are functions from possible worlds to appropriate extensions (names to individuals, n-place predicates to n-tuples, and sentences to truth values, built from parts).
|
|
From:
John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §8.1)
|
|
A reaction:
Interesting. Perry distinguishes 'referential' (or 'subject matter') content, which is prior to the link to extensions - a link which creates 'reflexive' content. He is keen that they should not become confused. True knowledge is 'situated'.
|
|
12151
|
If we replace 'I' in sentences about me, they are different beliefs and explanations of behaviour [Perry]
|
|
Full Idea:
If I leave a trail of sugar, and realise 'that I am making a mess', ...when we replace the word 'I' with other designations of me, we no longer have an explanation of my behaviour, or an attribution of the same belief, so it is an 'essential indexical'.
|
|
From:
John Perry (The Problem of the Essential Indexical [1979], 'Intro')
|
|
A reaction:
[compressed] A famous observation of Perry's, which leads him to challenge traditional accounts of belief and of propositions. I don't think I see a problem, if we have a thoroughly non-linguistic account of essentially unambiguous propositions.
|
|
16558
|
Laws of nature have very little application in biology [Machamer/Darden/Craver]
|
|
Full Idea:
The traditional notion of a law of nature has few, if any, applications in neurobiology or molecular biology.
|
|
From:
Machamer,P/Darden,L/Craver,C (Thinking About Mechanisms [2000], 3.2)
|
|
A reaction:
This is a simple and self-evident fact, and bad news for anyone who want to build their entire ontology around laws of nature. I take such a notion to be fairly empty, except as a convenient heuristic device.
|
|
15204
|
Actual tensed sentences cannot be tenseless, because they can cite their own context [Perry, by Le Poidevin]
|
|
Full Idea:
In the new tenseless theory, no tensed token sentence can be equivalent to a tenseless token, because the former, unlike the latter, draws attention to the context in which it is tokened.
|
|
From:
report of John Perry (The Problem of the Essential Indexical [1979]) by Robin Le Poidevin - Past, Present and Future of Debate about Tense 3 a
|
|
A reaction:
So the problem about indexicals was worrying fans of the tenseless B-series view of time (and so it should). I'm inclined to translate sentences containing indexicals into their actual propositions, which tend to avoid them. 'Time/person of utterance'.
|