13 ideas
1403 | A rational donkey would starve to death between two totally identical piles of hay [Buridan, by PG] |
16678 | Without magnitude a thing would retain its parts, but they would have no location [Buridan] |
16793 | A thing is (less properly) the same over time if each part is succeeded by another [Buridan] |
7301 | The phenomenalist says that to be is to be perceivable [Cardinal/Hayward/Jones] |
7302 | Linguistic phenomenalism says we can eliminate talk of physical objects [Cardinal/Hayward/Jones] |
7303 | If we lack enough sense-data, are we to say that parts of reality are 'indeterminate'? [Cardinal/Hayward/Jones] |
16726 | Why can't we deduce secondary qualities from primary ones, if they cause them? [Buridan] |
7299 | Primary qualities can be described mathematically, unlike secondary qualities [Cardinal/Hayward/Jones] |
7300 | An object cannot remain an object without its primary qualities [Cardinal/Hayward/Jones] |
7297 | My justifications might be very coherent, but totally unconnected to the world [Cardinal/Hayward/Jones] |
16577 | Induction is not demonstration, because not all of the instances can be observed [Buridan] |
22200 | If you eliminate the impossible, the truth will remain, even if it is weird [Conan Doyle] |
16576 | Science is based on induction, for general truths about fire, rhubarb and magnets [Buridan] |