green numbers give full details | back to texts | unexpand these ideas
| 19086 | Does the pragmatic theory of meaning support objective truth, or make it impossible? |
| Full Idea: Peirce and Sellars takes Peirce's conception of meaning, on which pragmatism is founded, to support an adequate account of objective truth; James, Dewey and Rorty say it forecloses all possibility of such an account. | |||
| From: Danielle Macbeth (Pragmatism and Objective Truth [2007], p.169) | |||
| A reaction: Ah. Very helpful. I thought there was a pragmatic theory of truth, then began to think that it was just a denial of truth. I've long suspected that Peirce is wonderful, and James is not very good (on this topic). |
| 19093 | Greek mathematics is wholly sensory, where ours is wholly inferential |
| Full Idea: Ancient mathematical concepts were essentially sensory; they were not mathematical in our sense - that is, wholly constituted by their inferential potential. | |||
| From: Danielle Macbeth (Pragmatism and Objective Truth [2007], p.187) | |||
| A reaction: The latter view is Frege's, though I suppose it had been emerging for a couple of centuries before him. I like the Greek approach, and would love to see that reunited with the supposedly quite different modern view. (Keith Hossack is attempting it). |
| 19091 | Seeing reality mathematically makes it an object of thought, not of experience |
| Full Idea: As mathematically understood, the world is not an object of experience but instead an object of thought. | |||
| From: Danielle Macbeth (Pragmatism and Objective Truth [2007], p.183) | |||
| A reaction: Since I am keen on citing biology to show that science does not have to be mathematical, this nicely shows that there is something wrong with a science which places a large gap between itself and the world. |
| 19088 | For pragmatists a concept means its consequences |
| Full Idea: In the pragmatist view, the meaning of a concept is exhausted by its consequences. | |||
| From: Danielle Macbeth (Pragmatism and Objective Truth [2007], p.173) | |||
| A reaction: I'm unclear why the concept of a volcanic eruption only concerns its dire consequences, and is supposed to contain nothing of its causes. Pragmatists seem to be all future, and no past. Very American. |