Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Mary Wollstonecraft, Zeno (Elea) and Duncan Pritchard

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


21 ideas

2. Reason / E. Argument / 1. Argument
My modus ponens might be your modus tollens [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: One philosopher's modus ponens is another philosopher's modus tollens.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 3.§2)
     A reaction: [Anyone know the originator of this nice thought?] You say A is true, and A proves B, so B is true. I reply that if A proves something as daft as B, then so much the worse for A. Ain't it the truth?
5. Theory of Logic / L. Paradox / 4. Paradoxes in Logic / a. Achilles paradox
We don't have time for infinite quantity, but we do for infinite divisibility, because time is also divisible [Aristotle on Zeno of Elea]
     Full Idea: Although it is impossible to make contact in a finite time with things that are infinite in quantity, it is possible to do so with things that are infinitely divisible, since the time itself is also infinite in this way.
     From: comment on Zeno (Elea) (fragments/reports [c.450 BCE], A25) by Aristotle - Physics 233a21
The fast runner must always reach the point from which the slower runner started [Zeno of Elea, by Aristotle]
     Full Idea: Zeno's so-called 'Achilles' claims that the slowest runner will never be caught by the fastest runner, because the one behind has first to reach the point from which the one in front started, and so the slower one is bound always to be in front.
     From: report of Zeno (Elea) (fragments/reports [c.450 BCE]) by Aristotle - Physics 239b14
     A reaction: The point is that the slower runner will always have moved on when the faster runner catches up with the starting point. We must understand how humble the early Greeks felt when they confronted arguments like this. It was like a divine revelation.
5. Theory of Logic / L. Paradox / 6. Paradoxes in Language / b. The Heap paradox ('Sorites')
Zeno is wrong that one grain of millet makes a sound; why should one grain achieve what the whole bushel does? [Aristotle on Zeno of Elea]
     Full Idea: Zeno is wrong in arguing that the tiniest fragment of millet makes a sound; there is no reason why the fragment should be able to move in any amount of time the air which the whole bushel moved as it fell.
     From: comment on Zeno (Elea) (fragments/reports [c.450 BCE], A29) by Aristotle - Physics 250a16
5. Theory of Logic / L. Paradox / 7. Paradoxes of Time
Zeno's arrow paradox depends on the assumption that time is composed of nows [Aristotle on Zeno of Elea]
     Full Idea: Zeno's third argument claims that a moving arrow is still. Here the conclusion depends on assuming that time is composed of nows; if this assumption is not granted, the argument fails.
     From: comment on Zeno (Elea) (fragments/reports [c.450 BCE], A27?) by Aristotle - Physics 239b5
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 9. Counterfactuals
An improbable lottery win can occur in a nearby possible world [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: Low probability events such as lottery wins can occur in nearby possible worlds.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 2.n2)
     A reaction: This seems to ruin any chance of mapping probabilities and counterfactuals in the neat model of nested possible worlds (like an onion). [Lewis must have thought of this, surely? - postcards, please]
11. Knowledge Aims / B. Certain Knowledge / 2. Common Sense Certainty
Moore begs the question, or just offers another view, or uses 'know' wrongly [Pritchard,D, by PG]
     Full Idea: The three main objections to Moore's common-sense refutation of scepticism is that it either begs the question, or it just offers a rival view instead of a refutation, or it uses 'know' in a conversationally inappropriate way.
     From: report of Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 3.§2) by PG - Db (ideas)
     A reaction: [I deserve applause for summarising two pages of Pritchard's wordy stuff so neatly]
13. Knowledge Criteria / A. Justification Problems / 2. Justification Challenges / c. Knowledge closure
We can have evidence for seeing a zebra, but no evidence for what is entailed by that [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: The closure principle forces us to regard Zula as knowing that what she is looking at is not a cleverly disguised mule, and yet she doesn't appear to have any supporting evidence for this knowledge.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 2.§3)
     A reaction: [Zula observes a zebra in the zoo] Entailment is a different type of justification from perception. If we add fallibilism to the mix, then fallibility can increase as we pursue a string of entailments. But proper logic, of course, should not be fallible.
Favouring: an entailment will give better support for the first belief than reason to deny the second [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: The Favouring Principle says that if S knows two things, and that the first entails the second, then S has better evidence in support of her belief in the first than she has for denying the second.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 2.§3)
     A reaction: [his version is full of Greek letters, but who wants that stuff?] Pritchard concludes that if you believe in the closure principle then you should deny the favouring principle.
Maybe knowledge just needs relevant discriminations among contrasting cases [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: According to the 'contrastivist' proposal knowledge is to be understood as essentially involving discrimination, such that knowing a proposition boils down to having the relevant discriminatory capacities.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 2.§6)
     A reaction: Pritchard says this isn't enough, and we must also to be aware of supporting favouring evidence. I would focus on the concept of coherence, even for simple perceptual knowledge. If I see a hawk in England, that's fine. What if I 'see' a vulture?
13. Knowledge Criteria / A. Justification Problems / 3. Internal or External / a. Pro-internalism
Epistemic internalism usually says justification must be accessible by reflection [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: Typically, internal epistemic conditions are characterised in terms of a reflective access requirement.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 1.§6)
     A reaction: If your justification is straightforwardly visual, it is unclear what the difference would be between seeing the thing and having reflective access to the seeing.
13. Knowledge Criteria / A. Justification Problems / 3. Internal or External / b. Pro-externalism
Externalism is better than internalism in dealing with radical scepticism [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: Standard epistemic internalism faces an uphill struggle when it comes to dealing with radical scepticism, which points in favour of epistemic externalist neo-Mooreanism.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 3.§3)
     A reaction: I incline towards internalism. I deal with scepticism by being a fallibilist, and adding 'but you never know' to every knowledge claim, and then getting on with life.
13. Knowledge Criteria / A. Justification Problems / 3. Internal or External / c. Disjunctivism
Disjunctivism says perceptual justification must be both factual and known by the agent [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: Slogan for disjunctivism: perceptual knowledge is paradigmatically constituted by a true belief whose epistemic support is both factive (i.e. it entails the truth of the propositions believed) and reflectively accessible to the agent.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], Intro)
     A reaction: I'm not a fan of externalism, but it could be that the factive bit achieves the knowledge, and then being able to use and answer for that knowledge may just be a bonus, and not an essential ingredient.
Metaphysical disjunctivism says normal perceptions and hallucinations are different experiences [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: Metaphysical disjunctivists hold that veridical perceptual experiences are not essentially the same as the experiences involved in corresponding cases involving illusion and (especially) hallucination.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 1.§4)
     A reaction: Metaphysical disjunctivism concerns what the experiences are; epistemological justification concerns the criteria of justification. I think. I wish Pritchard would spell things out more clearly. Indeed, I wish all philosophers would.
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 10. Anti External Justification
Epistemic externalism struggles to capture the idea of epistemic responsibility [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: A fundamental difficulty for epistemic externalist positions is that it is hard on this view to capture any adequate notion of epistemic responsibility.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], Intro)
     A reaction: He never explains the 'responsibility', but I presume that would be like an expert witness in court, vouching for their knowledge.
13. Knowledge Criteria / D. Scepticism / 1. Scepticism
We assess error against background knowledge, but that is just what radical scepticism challenges [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: When faced with an error-possibility we can appeal to background knowledge, as long as the error-possibility does not call into question this background knowledge. The same is not true when we focus on the radical sceptical hypothesis.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 2.§5)
     A reaction: [reworded] Doubting everything simultaneously just looks like a mad project. If you doubt linguistic meaning, you can't even express your doubts.
13. Knowledge Criteria / D. Scepticism / 6. Scepticism Critique
Radical scepticism is merely raised, and is not a response to worrying evidence [Pritchard,D]
     Full Idea: Crucially, radical sceptical error-possibilities are never epistemically motivated, but are instead merely raised.
     From: Duncan Pritchard (Epistemological Disjunctivism [2012], 3.§5)
     A reaction: In 'The Matrix' someone sees a glitch in the software (a cat crossing a passageway), and that would have to be taken seriously. Otherwise it is a nice strategy to ask why the sceptic is raising this bizzare possibility, without evidence.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 12. Feminism
If women share rights with men, they will exhibit similar virtues [Wollstonecraft]
     Full Idea: Let woman share the rights and she will emulate the virtues of man; for she must grow more perfect when emancipated, or justify that authority that chains such a weak being to her duty.
     From: Mary Wollstonecraft (Vindication of the Rights of Women [1792], p.294), quoted by Amartya Sen - The Idea of Justice 18 'Wrath'
     A reaction: Presumably this implies that if emancipation led to women exceeding men in such virtues, there would be some justification for imposing the chains on the men rather than the women. Consider wars. Probably best to just abandon chains.
26. Natural Theory / A. Speculations on Nature / 1. Nature
If there are many things they must have a finite number, but there must be endless things between them [Zeno of Elea]
     Full Idea: It things are many, they can't be more or less than they are, so they must be finite, but also there must be endless things between each thing, so they must be infinite.
     From: Zeno (Elea) (fragments/reports [c.450 BCE], B3), quoted by Simplicius - On Aristotle's 'Physics' 140.29
27. Natural Reality / A. Classical Physics / 1. Mechanics / a. Explaining movement
That which moves, moves neither in the place in which it is, nor in that in which it is not [Zeno of Elea]
     Full Idea: That which moves, moves neither in the place in which it is, nor in that in which it is not.
     From: Zeno (Elea) (fragments/reports [c.450 BCE], B4), quoted by (who?) - where?
27. Natural Reality / C. Space / 5. Relational Space
If everything is in a place, what is the place in? Place doesn't exist [Zeno of Elea, by Simplicius]
     Full Idea: If there is a place it will be in something, because everything that exists is in something. But what is in something is in a place. Therefore the place will be in a place, and so on ad infinitum. Therefore, there is no such thing as place.
     From: report of Zeno (Elea) (fragments/reports [c.450 BCE], B3) by Simplicius - On Aristotle's 'Physics' 9.562.3