more on this theme     |     more from this text


Single Idea 19668

[filed under theme 14. Science / C. Induction / 3. Limits of Induction ]

Full Idea

Hume's question can be formulated as follows: can we demonstrate that the experimental science which is possible today will still be possible tomorrow?

Gist of Idea

Hume's question is whether experimental science will still be valid tomorrow

Source

Quentin Meillassoux (After Finitude; the necessity of contingency [2006], 4)

Book Ref

Meillassoux: 'After Finitude: the necessity of contingency', ed/tr. Brassier,R [Bloomsbury 2008], p.86


A Reaction

Could there be deep universal changes going on in nature which science could never, even in principle, detect?


The 25 ideas from Quentin Meillassoux

Since Kant we think we can only access 'correlations' between thinking and being [Meillassoux]
Since Kant, objectivity is defined not by the object, but by the statement's potential universality [Meillassoux]
Unlike speculative idealism, transcendental idealism assumes the mind is embodied [Meillassoux]
The aspects of objects that can be mathematical allow it to have objective properties [Meillassoux]
How can we mathematically describe a world that lacks humans? [Meillassoux]
The transcendental subject is not an entity, but a set of conditions making science possible [Meillassoux]
We must give up the modern criterion of existence, which is a correlation between thought and being [Meillassoux]
The ontological proof of a necessary God ensures a reality external to the mind [Meillassoux]
Now that the absolute is unthinkable, even atheism is just another religious belief (though nihilist) [Meillassoux]
Non-contradiction is unjustified, so it only reveals a fact about thinking, not about reality? [Meillassoux]
In Kant the thing-in-itself is unknowable, but for us it has become unthinkable [Meillassoux]
We can allow contradictions in thought, but not inconsistency [Meillassoux]
Paraconsistent logics are to prevent computers crashing when data conflicts [Meillassoux]
Paraconsistent logic is about statements, not about contradictions in reality [Meillassoux]
The absolute is the impossibility of there being a necessary existent [Meillassoux]
It is necessarily contingent that there is one thing rather than another - so something must exist [Meillassoux]
Possible non-being which must be realised is 'precariousness'; absolute contingency might never not-be [Meillassoux]
The idea of chance relies on unalterable physical laws [Meillassoux]
If the laws of nature are contingent, shouldn't we already have noticed it? [Meillassoux]
Why are contingent laws of nature stable? [Meillassoux]
If we insist on Sufficient Reason the world will always be a mystery to us [Meillassoux]
Hume's question is whether experimental science will still be valid tomorrow [Meillassoux]
What is mathematically conceivable is absolutely possible [Meillassoux]
Since Kant, philosophers have claimed to understand science better than scientists do [Meillassoux]
The Copernican Revolution decentres the Earth, but also decentres thinking from reality [Meillassoux]