Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Marga Reimer, St John and R Feldman / E Conee

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


10 ideas

2. Reason / A. Nature of Reason / 2. Logos
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was God [John]
     Full Idea: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was God.
     From: St John (04: Gospel of St John [c.95], 01.01)
     A reaction: 'Word' translates the Greek word 'logos', which has come a long way since Heraclitus. The interesting contrast is with the later Platonist view that the essence of God is the Good. So is the source of everything to be found in reason, or in value?
3. Truth / A. Truth Problems / 2. Defining Truth
Jesus said he bore witness to the truth. Pilate asked, What is truth? [John]
     Full Idea: Jesus: I came into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth?
     From: St John (04: Gospel of St John [c.95], 18:37-8)
     A reaction: There is very little explicit discussion of truth in philosophy before this exchange (apart from Ideas 251 and 586), and there isn't any real debate prior to Russell and the pragmatists. What was Pilate's tone? Did he spit at the end of his question?
5. Theory of Logic / F. Referring in Logic / 1. Naming / e. Empty names
Unreflectively, we all assume there are nonexistents, and we can refer to them [Reimer]
     Full Idea: As speakers of the language, we unreflectively assume that there are nonexistents, and that reference to them is possible.
     From: Marga Reimer (The Problem of Empty Names [2001], p.499), quoted by Sarah Sawyer - Empty Names 4
     A reaction: Sarah Swoyer quotes this as a good solution to the problem of empty names, and I like it. It introduces a two-tier picture of our understanding of the world, as 'unreflective' and 'reflective', but that seems good. We accept numbers 'unreflectively'.
11. Knowledge Aims / A. Knowledge / 4. Belief / a. Beliefs
Involuntary beliefs can still be evaluated [Feldman/Conee]
     Full Idea: Examples confirm that beliefs may be both involuntary and subject to epistemic evaluation.
     From: R Feldman / E Conee (Evidentialism [1985], II)
     A reaction: This is an extremely important point, which summarises the situation with beliefs that arise from (apparent) immediate perception. A belief cannot possibly be knowledge if it has been triggered, but no effort was made to evaluate it.
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 3. Evidentialism / b. Evidentialism
Evidentialism is the view that justification is determined by the quality of the evidence [Feldman/Conee]
     Full Idea: What we call 'evidentialism' is the view that the epistemic justification of a belief is determined by the quality of the believer's evidence for the belief.
     From: R Feldman / E Conee (Evidentialism [1985], I)
     A reaction: The immediate question is whether the believer knows the quality of their evidence. A detective might not recognise the crucial clue (like the dog not barking). The definition of 'quality' had better not turn out to be circular. Forgotten evidence?
Beliefs should fit evidence, and if you ought to believe it, then you are justified [Feldman/Conee]
     Full Idea: One epistemically ought to have the doxastic attitudes that fit one's evidence. Being epistemically obligatory is equivalent to being epistemically justified.
     From: R Feldman / E Conee (Evidentialism [1985], III)
     A reaction: It is normal for someone to refuse to accept something, when another person believes the evidence is overwhelming. Evaluation of evidence must include an assessment of what other evidence might turn up.
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 3. Reliabilism / a. Reliable knowledge
If someone rejects good criticism through arrogance, that is irrelevant to whether they have knowledge [Feldman/Conee]
     Full Idea: If an arrogant young physicist refuses to recognise valid criticisms from a senior colleague, his or her character has nothing to do with the epistemic status of their belief in the theory.
     From: R Feldman / E Conee (Evidentialism [1985], III)
     A reaction: This rejects the idea that epistemic justification is essentially a matter of virtues and vices of character. That view is a version of reliabilism, and hence of externalism. I agree with the criticism, but epistemic virtues are still significant.
28. God / A. Divine Nature / 6. Divine Morality / c. God is the good
God is love [John]
     Full Idea: God is love.
     From: St John (23: First Epistle of John [c.90], 4.16)
     A reaction: Used by Ayer as an example of meaningless religious language (see Idea 5209). One might translate it as 'the existence of God is a necessary condition for the existence of love in the universe'. Like matter is needed for gravity. Not totally meaningless!
He that does evil has not seen God [John]
     Full Idea: He that doeth evil hath not seen God.
     From: St John (25: Third Epistle of John [c.90], 11)
     A reaction: This gives God a role striking similar to Plato's Form of the Good. Plato thought the Good was prior to the gods, but he gives the good a quasi-religious role. I say we would only be inspired by the sight of God if we already had a moral sense.
29. Religion / D. Religious Issues / 1. Religious Commitment / a. Religious Belief
If you love the world, then you do not love the Father [John]
     Full Idea: Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
     From: St John (23: First Epistle of John [c.90], 2.15)
     A reaction: This strikes me as an essentially wicked teaching, and one step on the road to suicide. The rejection of life is the worst aspect of all religions - surely it is obvious that we should try to make the best of life, not turn our backs on it?