Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'The Evolution of Modern Metaphysics', 'Goodbye Descartes' and 'Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


29 ideas

1. Philosophy / B. History of Ideas / 5. Later European Thought
Logic was merely a branch of rhetoric until the scientific 17th century [Devlin]
     Full Idea: Until the rise of what we call the scientific method in the seventeenth century, logic was regarded largely as one aspect of rhetoric - a study of how one person't argument could convince another.
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch.11)
     A reaction: This may well give the main reason why the Greeks invented logic in the first place. Aristotle wrote a book on rhetoric, and that was where the money was. Leibniz is clearly a key figure in the change of attitude.
1. Philosophy / E. Nature of Metaphysics / 1. Nature of Metaphysics
Metaphysics is the most general attempt to make sense of things [Moore,AW]
     Full Idea: Metaphysics is the most general attempt to make sense of things.
     From: A.W. Moore (The Evolution of Modern Metaphysics [2012], Intro)
     A reaction: This is the first sentence of Moore's book, and a touchstone idea all the way through. It stands up well, because it says enough without committing to too much. I have to agree with it. It implies explanation as the key. I like generality too.
3. Truth / C. Correspondence Truth / 1. Correspondence Truth
Truth has to be correspondence to facts, and a match between relations of ideas and relations in the world [Perry]
     Full Idea: I think knowledge and truth are a matter of correspondence to facts, despite all the energy spent showing the naïveté of this view. The connections of our ideas in our heads correspond to relations in the outside world.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §8.1)
     A reaction: Yes. Modern books offer the difficulties of defining 'correspondence', and finding an independent account of 'facts', as conclusive objections, but I say a brain is a truth machine, and it had better be useful. Indefinability doesn't nullify concepts.
4. Formal Logic / A. Syllogistic Logic / 2. Syllogistic Logic
'No councillors are bankers' and 'All bankers are athletes' implies 'Some athletes are not councillors' [Devlin]
     Full Idea: Most people find it hard to find any conclusion that fits the following premises: 'No councillors are bankers', and 'All bankers are athletes'. There is a valid conclusion ('Some athletes are not councillors') but it takes quite an effort to find it.
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 2)
     A reaction: A nice illustration of the fact that syllogistic logic is by no means automatic and straightforward. There is a mechanical procedure, but a lot of intuition and common sense is also needed.
4. Formal Logic / B. Propositional Logic PL / 1. Propositional Logic
Modern propositional inference replaces Aristotle's 19 syllogisms with modus ponens [Devlin]
     Full Idea: Where Aristotle had 19 different inference rules (his valid syllogisms), modern propositional logic carries out deductions using just one rule of inference: modus ponens.
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 4)
     A reaction: At first glance it sounds as if Aristotle's guidelines might be more useful than the modern one, since he tells you something definite and what implies what, where modus ponens just seems to define the word 'implies'.
4. Formal Logic / B. Propositional Logic PL / 2. Tools of Propositional Logic / e. Axioms of PL
Predicate logic retains the axioms of propositional logic [Devlin]
     Full Idea: Since predicate logic merely extends propositional logic, all the axioms of propositional logic are axioms of predicate logic.
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 4)
     A reaction: See Idea 7798 for the axioms.
5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 1. Overview of Logic
Situation theory is logic that takes account of context [Devlin]
     Full Idea: In many respects, situation theory is an extension of classical logic that takes account of context.
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 8)
     A reaction: John Barwise is cited as the parent of this movement. Many examples show that logical form is very hard to pin down, because word-meaning depends on context (e.g. 'several crumbs' differs from 'several mountains').
5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 2. History of Logic
Golden ages: 1900-1960 for pure logic, and 1950-1985 for applied logic [Devlin]
     Full Idea: The period from 1900 to about 1960 could be described as the golden age of 'pure' logic, and 1950 to 1985 the golden age of 'applied' logic (e.g. applied to everyday reasoning, and to theories of language).
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 4)
     A reaction: Why do we always find that we have just missed the Golden Age? However this supports the uneasy feeling that the golden age for all advances in human knowledge is just coming to an end. Biology, including the brain, is the last frontier.
Montague's intensional logic incorporated the notion of meaning [Devlin]
     Full Idea: Montague's intensional logic was the first really successful attempt to develop a mathematical framework that incorporates the notion of meaning.
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 8)
     A reaction: Previous logics, led by Tarski, had flourished by sharply dividing meaning from syntax, and concentrating on the latter.
5. Theory of Logic / B. Logical Consequence / 7. Strict Implication
Where a conditional is purely formal, an implication implies a link between premise and conclusion [Devlin]
     Full Idea: Implication involves some form of link or causality between the antecedent and the consequent of an if-then; normally it says that the conclusion is a consequence of the premise (where conditionals are just defined by 'true' and 'false').
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 2)
     A reaction: This distinction is a key one when discussing 'If-then' sentences. Some are merely formal conditionals, but others make real claims about where you can get to from where you are.
5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 1. Logical Form
Sentences of apparent identical form can have different contextual meanings [Devlin]
     Full Idea: "Safety goggles must be worn in the building" is clear enough, but "dogs must always be carried on the escalator" doesn't require us to head off in search of a dog.
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 1)
     A reaction: A nice illustration of how the requirements of logical form will often take us beyond the strict and literal meaning of a sentence, into context, tone, allusion and subjective aspects.
5. Theory of Logic / L. Paradox / 4. Paradoxes in Logic / a. Achilles paradox
Space and time are atomic in the arrow, and divisible in the tortoise [Devlin]
     Full Idea: The arrow paradox starts with the assumption that space and time are atomic; the tortoise starts with the opposite assumption that space and time are infinitely divisible.
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 2)
     A reaction: Aquinas similarly covers all options (the cosmos has a beginning, or no beginning). The nature of movement in a space which involves quantum leaps remains metaphysically puzzling. Where is a particle at half of the Planck time?
9. Objects / F. Identity among Objects / 1. Concept of Identity
Identity is a very weak relation, which doesn't require interdefinability, or shared properties [Perry]
     Full Idea: The truth of "a=b" doesn't require much of 'a' and 'b' other than that there is a single thing to which they both refer. They needn't be interdefinable, or have supervenient properties. In this sense, identity is a very weak relation.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §1.2)
     A reaction: Interesting. This is seeing the epistemological aspects of identity. Ontologically, identity must invoke Leibniz's Law, and is the ultimately powerful 'relation'. A given student, and the cause of a crop circle, may APPEAR to be quite different.
10. Modality / E. Possible worlds / 1. Possible Worlds / a. Possible worlds
Possible worlds thinking has clarified the logic of modality, but is problematic in epistemology [Perry]
     Full Idea: Using possible worlds to model truth-conditions of statements has led to considerable clarity about the logic of modality. Attempts to use the system for epistemic purposes, however, have been plagued by problems.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §8.1)
     A reaction: Presumably what lurks behind this is a distinction between what is logically or naturally possible, and what appears to be possible from the perspective of a conscious mind. Is there a possible world in which I can fly?
10. Modality / E. Possible worlds / 2. Nature of Possible Worlds / a. Nature of possible worlds
Possible worlds are indices for a language, or concrete realities, or abstract possibilities [Perry]
     Full Idea: Possible worlds can be thought of as indices for models of the language in question, or as concrete realities (David Lewis), or as abstract ways the world might be (Robert Stalnaker), or in various other ways.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §8.1)
     A reaction: I strongly favour the Stalnaker route here. Reducing great metaphysics to mere language I find abhorrent, and I suspect that Lewis was trapped by his commitment to strong empiricism. We must embrace abstractions into our ontology.
11. Knowledge Aims / C. Knowing Reality / 3. Idealism / b. Transcendental idealism
Appearances are nothing beyond representations, which is transcendental ideality [Moore,AW]
     Full Idea: Appearances in general are nothing outside our representations, which is just what we mean by transcendental ideality.
     From: A.W. Moore (The Evolution of Modern Metaphysics [2012], B535/A507)
13. Knowledge Criteria / E. Relativism / 5. Language Relativism
People still say the Hopi have no time concepts, despite Whorf's later denial [Devlin]
     Full Idea: The Hopi time myth does not appear to have been stopped for a moment by the fact that Whorf himself subsequently wrote that the Hopi language does indeed have words for past, present, and future
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 5)
     A reaction: Arguments for relativism based on the Hopi seem now to be thoroughly discredited. Sensible people never believed them in the first place.
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 3. Mental Causation
We try to cause other things to occur by causing mental events to occur [Perry]
     Full Idea: We try to cause other things to occur by causing mental events to occur.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §2.4)
     A reaction: A small and obvious, but important, point. Mental causation isn't just thoughts leading to physical happenings. Here Perry means that events can be designed to cause thoughts, such as a threatening letter. Not much room for epiphenomenalism here.
15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 1. Consciousness / a. Consciousness
Brain states must be in my head, and yet the pain seems to be in my hand [Perry]
     Full Idea: The brain state will involve certain parts of the brain, whereas my feeling of pain seems to be located in my hand insofar as it has a bodily location.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §1.2)
     A reaction: This seems important to me. The brain is a ventriloquist. Perry implies that pain is quasi-disembodied, but it isn't, it is just experienced as IN the hand. Perhaps it is in the hand? Cutting the nerves loses contact with the pain.
15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 1. Consciousness / f. Higher-order thought
It seems plausible that many animals have experiences without knowing about them [Perry]
     Full Idea: It seems quite plausible to me that many animals have experiences without knowing about them.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §3.1)
     A reaction: I agree, which makes us acknowledge levels of consciousness, which probably applies to human experience as well. The simplest idea is to distinguish between experiences which involve concepts, and those which don't. Animals sometimes appear surprised.
17. Mind and Body / A. Mind-Body Dualism / 6. Epiphenomenalism
If epiphenomenalism just says mental events are effects but not causes, it is consistent with physicalism [Perry]
     Full Idea: Epiphenomenalism is usually considered to be a form of dualism, but if we define it as the doctrine that conscious events are effects but not causes, it appears to be consistent with physicalism.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §4.2)
     A reaction: Interesting. The theory was invented to put mind outside physics, and make the closure of physics possible. However, being capable of causing things seems to be a necessary condition for physical objects. An effect in one domain is a cause in another.
17. Mind and Body / E. Mind as Physical / 2. Reduction of Mind
Prior to Kripke, the mind-brain identity theory usually claimed that the identity was contingent [Perry]
     Full Idea: Advocates of the mind-body identity theory typically claimed that identity between particular mental states and brain states was contingent, until Kripke argued persuasively that identity is always necessary.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §8.1)
     A reaction: Kripke wanted to argue against the identity theory, but what he seems to have done is reformulate it into a much more powerful version (involving necessary identity).
17. Mind and Body / E. Mind as Physical / 7. Anti-Physicalism / b. Multiple realisability
If physicalists stick with identity (not supervenience), Martian pain will not be like ours [Perry]
     Full Idea: The physicalist should not retreat to causal supervenience but should stick with identity. This means we will have to accept that a Martian and I (when in pain) are not in the same phenomenal state.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §4.3)
     A reaction: We naturally presume that frogs feel pain as we do, but many different phenomenal states could lead to the same behavioural end. Only an unpleasant feeling is required. A foul smell would do. Frogs could function with inverted qualia, too.
18. Thought / C. Content / 1. Content
Although we may classify ideas by content, we individuate them differently, as their content can change [Perry]
     Full Idea: Although we classify ideas by content for many purposes, we do not individuate them by content. The content of an idea can change.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §3.2)
     A reaction: As the compiler of this database, I find this very appealing. The mind works exactly like a database. I have a 'file' (Perry's word) marked "London", the content of which undergoes continual change. I am a database management system.
18. Thought / C. Content / 8. Intension
The intension of an expression is a function from possible worlds to an appropriate extension [Perry]
     Full Idea: In possible-worlds semantics, expressions have intensions, which are functions from possible worlds to appropriate extensions (names to individuals, n-place predicates to n-tuples, and sentences to truth values, built from parts).
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §8.1)
     A reaction: Interesting. Perry distinguishes 'referential' (or 'subject matter') content, which is prior to the link to extensions - a link which creates 'reflexive' content. He is keen that they should not become confused. True knowledge is 'situated'.
19. Language / C. Assigning Meanings / 1. Syntax
How do we parse 'time flies like an arrow' and 'fruit flies like an apple'? [Devlin]
     Full Idea: How do people identify subject and verb in the sentences "time flies like an arrow" and "fruit flies like an apple"?
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 1)
     A reaction: A nice illustration of the fact that even if we have an innate syntax mechanism, it won't work without some semantics, and some experience of the environmental context of utterances.
19. Language / D. Propositions / 2. Abstract Propositions / a. Propositions as sense
The distinction between sentences and abstract propositions is crucial in logic [Devlin]
     Full Idea: The distinction between sentences and the abstract propositions that they express is one of the key ideas of logic. A logical argument consists of propositions, assembled together in a systematic fashion.
     From: Keith Devlin (Goodbye Descartes [1997], Ch. 2)
     A reaction: He may claim that arguments consist of abstract propositions, but they always get expressed in sentences. However, the whole idea of logical form implies the existence of propositions - there is something which a messy sentence 'really' says.
19. Language / D. Propositions / 2. Abstract Propositions / b. Propositions as possible worlds
A proposition is a set of possible worlds for which its intension delivers truth [Perry]
     Full Idea: The proposition expressed by a sentence can be thought of as a set of possible worlds, the worlds for which its intension delivers truth.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §8.1)
     A reaction: It has always struck me as important to hang on to the concept of a 'proposition' (over and above sentences). This idea gives a metaphysics for the concept, and the 'language of thought' offers appropriate brain structures. A neat picture.
19. Language / E. Analyticity / 3. Analytic and Synthetic
A sharp analytic/synthetic line can rarely be drawn, but some concepts are central to thought [Perry]
     Full Idea: Although there is seldom a sharp analytic/synthetic distinction to be drawn in the case of our concepts, there are clearly things that are more and less central.
     From: John Perry (Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness [2001], §3.2)
     A reaction: Most Americans seem enslaved to Quine on this one, so it is nice to see the obvious being stated for once. Human thought is an organic offshoot of the natural world. To think it is all arbitrary and changeable is human arrogance.