Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for David O. Brink, Bryan Magee and Joan Kung

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


12 ideas

9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 7. Essence and Necessity / b. Essence not necessities
Jones may cease to exist without some simple property, but that doesn't make it essential [Kung]
9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 7. Essence and Necessity / c. Essentials are necessary
A property may belong essentially to one thing and contingently to another [Kung]
9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 8. Essence as Explanatory
Aristotelian essences underlie a thing's existence, explain it, and must belong to it [Kung]
14. Science / D. Explanation / 2. Types of Explanation / k. Explanations by essence
Some peripheral properties are explained by essential ones, but don't themselves explain properties [Kung]
Some non-essential properties may explain more than essential-but-peripheral ones do [Kung]
16. Persons / C. Self-Awareness / 3. Limits of Introspection
Why don't we experience or remember going to sleep at night? [Magee]
22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 2. Source of Ethics / h. Expressivism
Two people might agree in their emotional moral attitude while disagreeing in their judgement [Brink]
Emotivists find it hard to analyse assertions of moral principles, rather than actual judgements [Brink]
Emotivists claim to explain moral motivation by basing morality on non-cognitive attitudes [Brink]
Emotivists tend to favour a redundancy theory of truth, making moral judgement meaningless [Brink]
Emotivism implies relativism about moral meanings, but critics say disagreements are about moral reference [Brink]
How can emotivists explain someone who recognises morality but is indifferent to it? [Brink]