more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Dispositions of a thing are as important to us as overt behaviour, but they strike us by comparison as rather ethereal. So we are moved to enquire whether we can bring them down to earth, and explain disposition terms without reference to occult powers.
Gist of Idea
Dispositions seem more ethereal than behaviour; a non-occult account of them would be nice
Source
Nelson Goodman (Fact, Fiction and Forecast (4th ed) [1954], II.3)
Book Ref
Goodman,Nelson: 'Fact, Fiction and Forecast (4th ed)' [Harvard 1983], p.40
A Reaction
Mumford quotes this at the start of his book on dispositions, as his agenda. I suspect that the 'occult' aspect crept in because dispositions were based on powers, and the dominant view was that these were the immediate work of God.
18749 | Goodman argued that the confirmation relation can never be formalised [Goodman, by Horsten/Pettigrew] |
17646 | Goodman showed that every sound inductive argument has an unsound one of the same form [Goodman, by Putnam] |
14292 | Dispositions seem more ethereal than behaviour; a non-occult account of them would be nice [Goodman] |
4794 | We don't use laws to make predictions, we call things laws if we make predictions with them [Goodman] |
12394 | If the result is bad, we change the rule; if we like the rule, we reject the result [Goodman] |