Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Solon, Lukes and Keith Campbell

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


30 ideas

5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 6. Relations in Logic
Relations need terms, so they must be second-order entities based on first-order tropes [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: Because there cannot be relations without terms, in a meta-physic that makes first-order tropes the terms of all relations, relational tropes must belong to a second, derivative order.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §8)
     A reaction: The admission that there could be a 'derivative order' may lead to trouble for trope theory. Ostrich Nominalists could say that properties themselves are derivative second-order abstractions from indivisible particulars. Russell makes them first-order.
7. Existence / B. Change in Existence / 4. Events / c. Reduction of events
Events are trope-sequences, in which tropes replace one another [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: Events are widely acknowledged to be particulars, but they are plainly not ordinary concrete particulars. They are best viewed as trope-sequences, in which one condition gives way to another. They are changes in which tropes replace one another.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §3)
     A reaction: If nothing exists except bundles of tropes, it is worth asking WHY one trope would replace another. Some tropes are active (i.e. they are best described as 'powers').
8. Modes of Existence / B. Properties / 13. Tropes / a. Nature of tropes
Two red cloths are separate instances of redness, because you can dye one of them blue [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: If we have two cloths of the very same shade of redness, we can show there are two cloths by burning one and leaving the other unaffected; we show there are two cases of redness in the same way: dye one blue, leaving the other unaffected.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §1)
     A reaction: This has to be one of the basic facts of the problem accepted by everyone. If you dye half of one of the pieces, was the original red therefore one instance or two? Has it become two? How many red tropes are there in a red cloth?
Red could only recur in a variety of objects if it was many, which makes them particulars [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: If there are a varied group of red objects, the only element that recurs is the colour. But it must be the colour as a particular (a 'trope') that is involved in the recurrence, for only particulars can be many in the way required for recurrence.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §1)
     A reaction: This claim seems to depend on the presupposition that rednesses are countable things, but it is tricky trying to count the number of blue tropes in the sky.
Tropes solve the Companionship Difficulty, since the resemblance is only between abstract particulars [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: The 'companionship difficulty' cannot arise if the members of the resemblance class are tropes rather than whole concrete particulars. The instances of having a heart, as abstract particulars, are quite different from instances of having a kidney.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §6)
     A reaction: The companionship difficulty seems worst if you base your account of properties just on being members of a class. Any talk of resemblance eventually has to talk about 'respects' of resemblance. Is a trope a respect? Is a mode an object?
Tropes solve the Imperfect Community problem, as they can only resemble in one respect [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: The 'problem of imperfect community' cannot arise where our resemblance sets are sets of tropes. Tropes, by their very nature and mode of differentiation can only resemble in one respect.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §6)
     A reaction: You arrive at very different accounts of what resemblance means according to how you express the problem verbally. We can only find a solution through thinking which transcends language. Heresy!
Trope theory makes space central to reality, as tropes must have a shape and size [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: The metaphysics of abstract particulars gives a central place to space, or space-time, as the frame of the world. ...Tropes are, of their essence, regional, which carries with it the essential presence of shape and size in any trope occurrence.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §7)
     A reaction: Trope theory has a problem with Aristotle's example (Idea 557) of what happens when white is mixed with white. Do two tropes become one trope if you paint on a second coat of white? How can particulars merge? How can abstractions merge?
8. Modes of Existence / E. Nominalism / 2. Resemblance Nominalism
Nominalism has the problem that without humans nothing would resemble anything else [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: The objection to nominalism is its consequence that if there were no human race (or other living things), nothing would be like anything else.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §6)
     A reaction: Anti-realists will be unflustered by this difficulty. Personally it strikes me as obvious that some aspects of resemblance are part of reality which we did not contribute. This I take to be a contingent fact, founded on the existence of natural kinds.
9. Objects / A. Existence of Objects / 1. Physical Objects
Tropes are basic particulars, so concrete particulars are collections of co-located tropes [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: If tropes are basic particulars, then concrete particulars count as dependent realities. They are collections of co-located tropes, depending on these tropes as a fleet does upon its component ships.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §2)
     A reaction: If I sail my yacht through a fleet, do I become part of it? Presumably trope theory could avoid a bundle view of objects. A bare substratum could be a magnet which attracts tropes.
Bundles must be unique, so the Identity of Indiscernibles is a necessity - which it isn't! [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: Each individual is distinct from each other individual, so the bundle account of objects requires each bundle to be different from every other bundle. So the Identity of Indiscernibles must be a necessary truth, which, unfortunately, it is not.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §5)
     A reaction: Clearly the Identity of Indiscernibles is not a necessary truth (consider just two identical spheres). Location and time must enter into it. Could we not add a further individuation requirement to the necessary existence of a bundle? (Quinton)
9. Objects / F. Identity among Objects / 7. Indiscernible Objects
Two pure spheres in non-absolute space are identical but indiscernible [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: The Identity of Indiscernibles is not a necessary truth. It fails in possible worlds where there are two identical spheres in a non-absolute space, or worlds without beginning or end where events are exactly cyclically repeated.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §5)
     A reaction: The principle was always very suspect, and these seem nice counterexamples. As so often, epistemology and ontology had become muddled.
18. Thought / E. Abstraction / 3. Abstracta by Ignoring
Abstractions come before the mind by concentrating on a part of what is presented [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: An item is abstract if it is got before the mind by an act of abstraction, that is, by concentrating attention on some, but not all, of what is presented.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §1)
     A reaction: I think this point is incredibly important. Pure Fregean semantics tries to leave out the psychological component, and yet all the problems in semantics concern various sorts of abstraction. Imagination is the focus of the whole operation.
20. Action / A. Definition of Action / 1. Action Theory
There is collective action, where a trend is manifest, but is not attributable to individuals [Lukes]
     Full Idea: There is a phenomenon of collective action, where the policy or action of a collectivity is manifest, but not attributable to particular individuals' decisions or behaviour.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], 1.4)
     A reaction: This observation of Lukes is seen as important in the understanding of social power, but it is also significant for the understanding of the theory of action. Small racial slights by individuals can indicate institutional racism.
24. Political Theory / C. Ruling a State / 1. Social Power
Hidden powers are the most effective [Lukes]
     Full Idea: Power is at its most effective when it is least observable.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], Intro)
     A reaction: Kind of common sense, though his account has been very influential. We must be cautious about asserting the existence of powers which are massive but totally undetectable.
Power is a capacity, which may never need to be exercised [Lukes]
     Full Idea: Power is a capacity not the exercise of that capacity (it may never be, and never need to be, exercised); and you can be powerful by satisfying and advancing others' interests.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], Intro)
     A reaction: A school teacher could, in extremis, bring in the army to control a wildly anarchic class of kids. You control kids by making them want to do what you want them to do.
The pluralist view says that power is restrained by group rivalry [Lukes]
     Full Idea: In the 1950s 'pluralism' was a common idea about power - that the concentration of power in America is not excessive because one group always balances the power of others.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], Intro)
     A reaction: [He cites Alan Wolfe's 2000 intro to C. Wright Mills] There must be something to this idea. In the UK we encourage the existence of an official opposition to the government for that reason.
One-dimensionsal power is behaviour in observable conflicts of interests [Lukes]
     Full Idea: The one-dimensional view of power involves a focus on behaviour in the making of decisions on issues over which there is an observable conflict of (subjective) interests, revealed by political participation.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], 1.2)
     A reaction: It seems unbalanced to give this the pejorative label 'one-dimensional', as if it wasn't really power at all. Watching police beating demonstrators looks like real power to me. His point that power runs deeper is, of course, a good one.
Political organisation brings some conflicts to the fore, and suppresses others [Lukes]
     Full Idea: All forms of political organisation have a bias in favour of the exploitation of some kinds of conflict and the suppression of others, because organisation is the mobilisation of bias. Some issues are organised into politics while others are organised out
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], 1.3)
     A reaction: [He cites Schattschneider 1960] This is what Lukes calls the two-dimensional theory of power. The point is that students of power should observe what does not happen, as well as what does.
The two-dimensional view of power recognises the importance of controlling the agenda [Lukes]
     Full Idea: The two-dimensional view of power is a major advance over the one-dimensional view. It incorporates the question of the control of the agenda in politics.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], 1.4)
     A reaction: So One-D is controlling what happens in conflicts, and Two-D is controlling the nature of the conflicts. If we keep digging we may come to the power which no one knows exists.
Power can be exercised to determine a person's desires [Lukes]
     Full Idea: A may exercise power over B by getting him to do what he does not want to do, but also by influencing, shaping or determining his very wants.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], 1.4)
     A reaction: The classic modern instances of this are advertising and control of the media. This was apparently a new idea from Lukes, but it seems fairly obvious now. This is his third dimension of power.
Power is the capacity of a social class to realise its interests [Lukes]
     Full Idea: Poulantzas (1968) defined his concept of power as the capacity of a social class to realise its specific objective interests.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], 1.8)
     A reaction: Lukes offers this as an account of power in terms of structures, rather than of the actions of individuals. Lukes says that power must include the ability of the agent to act differently. Power must involve responsibility. Power is not fate.
The evidence for the exertion of power need not involve a grievance of the powerless [Lukes]
     Full Idea: It is inadequate to insist that nondecision-making power only exists where there are grievances which are denied entry into the political process in the form of issues.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], 1.4)
     A reaction: A simple example would be where they tricked you into thinking you couldn't vote in an election, or where the women didn't realise the men were paid more. Part of his third dimension of power.
Power is affecting a person in a way contrary to their interests [Lukes]
     Full Idea: I have defined the concept of power by saying that A exercises power over B when A affects B in a manner contrary to B's interests
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], 1.6)
     A reaction: I assume he is not referring to when I accidentally spill your beer. His point is, I think, that neither A nor B may be fully, or even partly, aware of what is going on. Presumably A can also exert power over B which is in B's interests. Dentists.
Supreme power is getting people to have thoughts and desires chosen by you [Lukes]
     Full Idea: Is it not the supreme exercise of power to get another or others to have the desires you want them to have - that is, to secure their compliance by controlling their thoughts and desires?
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], p.27), quoted by Andrew Shorten - Contemporary Political Theory 06
     A reaction: This seems to be beyond dispute. When the operation is successful, those under your power not only do not need to be intimidated, but they don't even need to be guided. But if two people are in perfect harmony, which one has the power?
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 1. Ideology
In the 1950s they said ideology is finished, and expertise takes over [Lukes]
     Full Idea: In the 1950s there was talk of the 'end of ideology' - that grand passions over ideas were exhausted, and in future problems would be solved by technical expertise.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], Intro)
     A reaction: An understandable thought, once fascism and communism seemed to have burned themselves out. Political commentators always try to grip the crowds with simplistic labels, but fewer people will now read up an ideology. Tacit ideology.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 6. Liberalism / a. Liberalism basics
Liberals take people as they are, and take their preferences to be their interests [Lukes]
     Full Idea: Liberals take people as they are, and relates their interests to what they actually want or prefer.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], 1.6)
     A reaction: He contrasts this with 'reformists' and 'radicals'. I don't see why liberals should be so uncritical of people's desires. Liberals aren't going to implement harmful policies, simply because people want them. He treats liberals as one-dimensional.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 11. Capitalism
Anyone who thinks capitalism can improve their lives is endorsing capitalism [Lukes]
     Full Idea: Wage earners consent to capitalist organisation of society when they act as if they could improve their material conditions within the confines of capitalism.
     From: Steven Lukes (Power: a Radical View (2nd ed) [2005], Intro)
     A reaction: [He is citing Przeworski 1985] Not plausible as it stands. Does a prisoner who tries to improve their life within a hideous prison thereby endorse the prison system? In Auschwitz? Slaves can go along with the system for years, then suddenly rebel.
25. Social Practice / D. Justice / 3. Punishment / c. Deterrence of crime
The greatest deterrence for injustice is if uninjured parties feel as much indignation as those who are injured [Solon, by Diog. Laertius]
     Full Idea: Men can be most effectively deterred from committing injustice if those who are not injured feel as much indignation as those who are.
     From: report of Solon (reports [c.600 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 01.So.10
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 8. Particular Causation / b. Causal relata
Causal conditions are particular abstract instances of properties, which makes them tropes [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: The conditions in causal statements are usually particular cases of properties. A collapse results from the weakness of this cable (not any other). This is specific to a time and place; it is an abstract particular. It is, in short, a trope.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §3)
     A reaction: The fan of universals could counter this by saying that the collapse results from this unique combination of universals. Resemblance nominalist can equally build an account on the coincidence of certain types of concrete particulars.
Davidson can't explain causation entirely by events, because conditions are also involved [Campbell,K]
     Full Idea: Not all singular causal statements are of Davidson's event-event type. Many involve conditions, so there are condition-event (weakness/collapse), event-condition (explosion/movement), and condition-condition (hot/warming) causal connections.
     From: Keith Campbell (The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars [1981], §3)
     A reaction: Fans of Davidson need to reduce conditions to events. The problem of individuation keeps raising its head. Davidson makes it depend on description. Kim looks good, because events, and presumably conditions, reduce to something small and precise.