13 ideas
| 17082 | Paradox: why do you analyse if you know it, and how do you analyse if you don't? [Ruben] |
| 16186 | The Barcan Formulas express how to combine modal operators with classical quantifiers [Simchen] |
| 16187 | The Barcan Formulas are orthodox, but clash with the attractive Actualist view [Simchen] |
| 16190 | BF implies that if W possibly had a child, then something is possibly W's child [Simchen] |
| 16188 | Serious Actualism says there are no facts at all about something which doesn't exist [Simchen] |
| 17087 | The 'symmetry thesis' says explanation and prediction only differ pragmatically [Ruben] |
| 17081 | Usually explanations just involve giving information, with no reference to the act of explanation [Ruben] |
| 17092 | An explanation needs the world to have an appropriate structure [Ruben] |
| 17090 | Most explanations are just sentences, not arguments [Ruben] |
| 17094 | The causal theory of explanation neglects determinations which are not causal [Ruben] |
| 17088 | Reducing one science to another is often said to be the perfect explanation [Ruben] |
| 16861 | A false theory could hardly rival the explanatory power of natural selection [Darwin] |
| 17089 | Facts explain facts, but only if they are conceptualised or named appropriately [Ruben] |