Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Douglas Lackey, Dag Prawitz and Earl Conee

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


16 ideas

5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 1. Overview of Logic
Logic is based on transitions between sentences [Prawitz]
5. Theory of Logic / B. Logical Consequence / 1. Logical Consequence
Logical consequence isn't a black box (Tarski's approach); we should explain how arguments work [Prawitz]
5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 2. Logical Connectives / a. Logical connectives
Natural deduction introduction rules may represent 'definitions' of logical connectives [Prawitz]
5. Theory of Logic / H. Proof Systems / 4. Natural Deduction
In natural deduction, inferences are atomic steps involving just one logical constant [Prawitz]
5. Theory of Logic / J. Model Theory in Logic / 1. Logical Models
Model theory looks at valid sentences and consequence, but not how we know these things [Prawitz]
5. Theory of Logic / L. Paradox / 5. Paradoxes in Set Theory / b. Cantor's paradox
Sets always exceed terms, so all the sets must exceed all the sets [Lackey]
5. Theory of Logic / L. Paradox / 5. Paradoxes in Set Theory / c. Burali-Forti's paradox
It seems that the ordinal number of all the ordinals must be bigger than itself [Lackey]
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 3. Evidentialism / b. Evidentialism
Evidentialism is not axiomatic; the evidence itself inclines us towards evidentialism [Conee]
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 3. Reliabilism / b. Anti-reliabilism
If pure guesses were reliable, reliabilists would have to endorse them [Conee]
More than actual reliability is needed, since I may mistakenly doubt what is reliable [Conee]
Reliabilism is poor on reflective judgements about hypothetical cases [Conee]
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 6. Contextual Justification / a. Contextualism
People begin to doubt whether they 'know' when the answer becomes more significant [Conee]
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 6. Contextual Justification / b. Invariantism
Maybe low knowledge standards are loose talk; people will deny that it is 'really and truly' knowledge [Conee]
Maybe knowledge has fixed standards (high, but attainable), although people apply contextual standards [Conee]
That standards vary with context doesn't imply different truth-conditions for judgements [Conee]
Maybe there is only one context (the 'really and truly' one) for serious discussions of knowledge [Conee]