Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Tim Bayne, Lewis Carroll (C.Dodgson) and John Greco

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


10 ideas

1. Philosophy / A. Wisdom / 1. Nature of Wisdom
Wisdom has a higher value than understanding, which has a higher value than knowledge [Greco]
     Full Idea: Intuitively, understanding is more valuable than knowledge and wisdom is more valuable than understanding.
     From: John Greco (The Value Problem [2011], 'Knowledge')
     A reaction: Down at the bottom is having an 'inkling' of something, I presume. Not convinced of this. I would rate understanding above knowledge, but wisdom seems rather different. It implies a breadth that does not focus on any particular topic.
7. Existence / A. Nature of Existence / 3. Being / e. Being and nothing
I only wish I had such eyes as to see Nobody! It's as much as I can do to see real people. [Carroll,L]
     Full Idea: "I see nobody on the road," said Alice. - "I only wish I had such eyes," the King remarked. ..."To be able to see Nobody! ...Why, it's as much as I can do to see real people."
     From: Lewis Carroll (C.Dodgson) (Through the Looking Glass [1886], p.189), quoted by A.W. Moore - The Evolution of Modern Metaphysics 07.7
     A reaction: [Moore quotes this, inevitably, in a chapter on Hegel] This may be a better candidate for the birth of philosophy of language than Frege's Groundwork.
13. Knowledge Criteria / A. Justification Problems / 1. Justification / b. Need for justification
If value is practical, knowledge is no better than true opinion [Greco]
     Full Idea: Why should knowledge be more valuable than true opinion, if their practical value is the same?
     From: John Greco (The Value Problem [2011], Intro)
     A reaction: We have exam systems and academic titles to bestow social prestige on people who know, not to mention quiz shows. Modern society needs lots of knowledgeable citizens. I'm not sure what intrinsic value knowledge could have.
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 3. Evidentialism / a. Evidence
How we evaluate evidence depends on our background beliefs [Bayne]
     Full Idea: A claim that might be very plausible given one set of background beliefs might be highly implausible when evaluated in the light of a different set of background beliefs.
     From: Tim Bayne (Thought: a very short introduction [2013], Ch.7)
Clifford's dictum seems to block our beliefs in morality, politics and philosophy [Bayne]
     Full Idea: Endorsing Clifford's dictum threatens to undermine our right to hold many of our most cherished beliefs about morality, politics, and philosophy, for these are domains in which it is notoriously difficult to secure consensus.
     From: Tim Bayne (Thought: a very short introduction [2013], Ch.7)
     A reaction: I would say that those beliefs are amenable to evidence, but the evidence is often highly generalised, which is what makes those subjects notoriously difficult. The existence of a convention is a sort of evidence.
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 10. Anti External Justification
Externalist theories don't explain why knowledge has value [Greco]
     Full Idea: Externalist theories do not give knowledge the sort of value that internalists want knowledge to have.
     From: John Greco (The Value Problem [2011], Intro)
     A reaction: [He cites Pritchard 2008] This is not a very strong argument, given the uncertainties and complexities in the idea that we share a 'value'. If the value of knowledge is really instrumental (and loved no less because of that), then externalism could cope.
17. Mind and Body / E. Mind as Physical / 1. Physical Mind
Physicalism correlates brain and mind, explains causation by thought, and makes nature continuous [Bayne]
     Full Idea: The motivations for physicalism about the mind are that it accounts for correlations between states of the brain and states of thought, ...that it accounts for the causal role of thoughts, ...and that it does justice to the continuity of nature.
     From: Tim Bayne (Thought: a very short introduction [2013], Ch.2)
     A reaction: [summary] That is a pretty good summary of why I am a physicalist about the mind. I take all other theories to be dead footnotes in the history of thought - unless someone can produce a really good new argument. Which they can't.
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 8. Human Thought
Perception reveals what animals think, but humans can disengage thought from perception [Bayne]
     Full Idea: One striking feature of human thought involves our ability to disengage the focus of thought from that of our perceptual attention. ...To get a fix on what an animal is thinking about, one need only determine the object of its perceptual attention.
     From: Tim Bayne (Thought: a very short introduction [2013], Ch.4)
     A reaction: What happens when an animal closes its eyes, or stirs violently during sleep? I take the hallmark of human thought to be its multi-level character, and this offers nice evidence for that view. Doing philosophy while driving a car is very revealing.
Some people centre space on themselves; others centre space on the earth [Bayne]
     Full Idea: Egocentric conceptions of space employ a frame of reference that is focused on oneself; ...geocentric conceptions of space, by contrast, employ a frame of reference that is centred on the earth.
     From: Tim Bayne (Thought: a very short introduction [2013], Ch.5)
     A reaction: Famously, Europeans nearly always employ the egocentric conception, but many other cultures are geocentric. Thus the salt cellar is either 'to my left' or 'to the west'. In the latter view, everyone always knows their orientation (even indoors?).
18. Thought / B. Mechanics of Thought / 4. Language of Thought
The alternative to a language of thought is map-like or diagram-like thought [Bayne]
     Full Idea: One could think that the structure of thought has more in common with that of maps or diagrams, and is not particularly language-like.
     From: Tim Bayne (Thought: a very short introduction [2013], Ch.2)
     A reaction: It seems unwise to be ensnared by analogies on this one, since the phenomenon is buried deep. You can no more infer what goes on underneath than you can infer electrons from looking at trees?