display all the ideas for this combination of texts
2 ideas
19807 | Both nature and reason require that everything has a cause [Rousseau] |
Full Idea: Under the law of reason nothing takes place without a cause, any more than under the law of nature. | |
From: Jean-Jacques Rousseau (The Social Contract (tr Cress) [1762], II.04) | |
A reaction: Is this the influence of Leibniz? Note that the principle is identified in two different areas, so in nature we may say 'everything has a cause', and in rationality we may say 'there is a reason for everything'. But are these the same? |
12619 | We have no successful definitions, because they all use indefinable words [Fodor] |
Full Idea: There are practically no defensible examples of definitions; for all the examples we've got, practically all the words (/concepts) are undefinable. | |
From: Jerry A. Fodor (Concepts:where cogn.science went wrong [1998], Ch.3) | |
A reaction: I don't think a definition has to be defined all the way down. Aristotle is perfectly happy if you can get a concept you don't understand down to concepts you do. Understanding is the test, not further definitions. |