52 ideas
3879 | Philosophy aims to provide a theory of everything [Scruton] |
Full Idea: Philosophy studies everything: it tries to provide a theory of the whole of things. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 1.2) | |
A reaction: Good, but you can't avoid value-judgements about which things are important; philosophers place more value on moral theories than on theories about glacier movement. There is a tension in philosophy between human and eternal concerns. |
3891 | If p entails q, then p is sufficient for q, and q is necessary for p [Scruton] |
Full Idea: If p entails q, then p is sufficient for q, and q is necessary for p. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 15.7) |
11159 | My account shows how the concept works, rather than giving an analysis [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: My assimilation of essence to definition ...may not provide us with an analysis of the concept, but it does provide us with a good model of how the concept works. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 3) | |
A reaction: An example of the modern shift in analytic philosophy, away from the dream of given a complete analysis of a concept, towards giving an account of the concepts relationships. Compare Shoemaker in Idea 8559. |
11157 | Modern philosophy has largely abandoned real definitions, apart from sortals [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: In modern analytic philosophy we find that, as a result of sustained empiricist critique, the idea of real definition has been more or less given up (unless it be taken to be vestigially present in the notion of a sortal). | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 3) | |
A reaction: The account of essences as falling under sortals (roughly, categorising terms) is associated with David Wiggins. Kit Fine is in the business of reviving Aristotelian real definitions, as are fans of scientific essentialism (see under 'Nature'). |
11171 | Defining a term and giving the essence of an object don't just resemble - they are the same [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: There is an analogy between defining a term and giving the essence of an object. ..However, I am inclined to think that the two cases are not merely parallel but are, at bottom, the same. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p.13) | |
A reaction: The proposal is something like the meaning of a concept being the essence of the concept. And essence is definition. The parallel is that they both lead to necessities, either derived from objects or from concepts. Sounds good to me. |
3894 | We may define 'good' correctly, but then ask whether the application of the definition is good [Scruton] |
Full Idea: The 'open question' argument is clearly invalid. A question remains open just so long as our ignorance permits. …It may be an open question whether promoting happiness is good, even though this is what 'good' means. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 20.1) | |
A reaction: A nice objection. Like small children, we can keep asking questions forever. Whether there is a question to be asked about a thing is not a property of that thing, but of us who ask it. |
3883 | A true proposition is consistent with every other true proposition [Scruton] |
Full Idea: A true proposition is consistent with every other true proposition: no truth is contradicted by another. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 9.1) | |
A reaction: Interesting. It resembles the rule that if you always tell the truth you don't need to remember what you said. Close to the heart of the concept of truth. Coherence and correspondence. |
3884 | The pragmatist does not really have a theory of truth [Scruton] |
Full Idea: The pragmatist does not really have a theory of truth. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 9.4) |
3907 | Could you be intellectually acquainted with numbers, but unable to count objects? [Scruton] |
Full Idea: Could someone have a perfect intellectual acquaintance with numbers, but be incapable of counting a flock of sheep? | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 26.6) |
3908 | If maths contains unprovable truths, then maths cannot be reduced to a set of proofs [Scruton] |
Full Idea: If there can be unprovable truths of mathematics, then mathematics cannot be reduced to the proofs whereby we construct it. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 26.7) |
11151 | An object is dependent if its essence prevents it from existing without some other object [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: One object depends upon another (in one sense of the term) if its essence prevents it from existing without the other object. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 2) | |
A reaction: I take the interest of this to be that essences are usually thought to be intrinsic, but this seems to involve the object in necessary external relations. |
3906 | If possible worlds are needed to define properties, maybe we should abandon properties [Scruton] |
Full Idea: If the only way of defining properties involves quantifying over possible worlds, this could be taken as another reason for abandoning properties altogether. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 26.4) |
11152 | Essences are either taken as real definitions, or as necessary properties [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: Essence has been conceived either on the model of definition, involving the 'real' as opposed to 'nominal' definitions, or it is elucidated in modal terms, located in de re cases of modal attributions (an object being necessarily a certain way). | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 2) | |
A reaction: [compressed] Fine sets out to defend the definitional view, which derives from Aristotle, his line being that necessity depends on essence, and so cannot be used to define it. I think I agree. |
11161 | Essentially having a property is naturally expressed as 'the property it must have to be what it is' [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: We have an informal way of saying an object essentially has a property, as 'the object must have the property if it is to be the object that it is', and this form of words manages to convey what we wish to convey. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 4) | |
A reaction: The importance of this claim is that it makes no mention of 'necessity'. Fine's view is plausible, but hard to evaluate once he has said. We seem to then divide an object's properties into identity properties, causal properties and peripheral properties. |
11160 | Simple modal essentialism refers to necessary properties of an object [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: The simplest form of the modal account takes an object to have a property essentially just in case it is necessary that the object has the property. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 3) | |
A reaction: Fine wants to reverse the account, explaining necessities in terms of prior essences. |
11158 | Essentialist claims can be formulated more clearly with quantified modal logic [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: With the advent of quantified modal logic, philosophers have been in a better position to formulate essentialist claims. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 3) | |
A reaction: A nice illustration of the role which logic plays in modern analytic philosophy. It is not an unreasonable assumption that we will understand a theoretical problem more clearly if we can articulate it more accurately. |
11167 | Metaphysical necessity is a special case of essence, not vice versa [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: Far from viewing essence as a special case of metaphysical necessity, we should view metaphysical necessity as a special case of essence. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 9) | |
A reaction: This strikes me as one of the most powerful proposals in modern philosophy (even if it is a reiteration of Aristotle!). |
16537 | Essence as necessary properties produces a profusion of essential properties [Fine,K, by Lowe] |
Full Idea: If an essence is a sum of essential properties (had in all possible worlds where it exists), Fine points out that it seems grossly to overgenerate essential properties ('S is either a man or a mouse', or 'S is such that 2+2=4'). | |
From: report of Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994]) by E.J. Lowe - What is the Source of Knowledge of Modal Truths? 6 | |
A reaction: To me this is the sort of mess you get into when you accept that 'being such that p' is a property. Defenders of the modal approach always have to eliminate 'trivial' properties from essences, but non-trivial is a defining feature of an essence. |
11163 | The nature of singleton Socrates has him as a member, but not vice versa [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: Can we not recognise a sense of 'what an object is', according to which it lies in the nature of a singleton to have Socrates as a member, even though it does not lie in the nature of Socrates to belong to the singleton? | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 5) | |
A reaction: Important and persuasive. It echoes the example in Idea 11162, that the necessary relation is not part of the essence. Socrates is necessarily in {Socrates}, but that is because of the set, not because of Socrates. Essences causes necessities. |
11164 | It is not part of the essence of Socrates that a huge array of necessary truths should hold [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: Necessarily any necessary truth will hold if Socrates exists. But it is no part of Socrates' essence that there be infinitely many prime numbers, ..or that objects like the Eiffel Tower have their own necessary essence. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 5-6) | |
A reaction: This and the 'singleton Socrates' example (Idea 11165) are the twin prongs of Fine's attack on the modal account of essentialism. I think they constitute one of the best single pages in the whole of recent philosophy. Bravo. |
10935 | An essential property of something must be bound up with what it is to be that thing [Fine,K, by Rami] |
Full Idea: Fine's view is that the notion of an essential property of a thing should be bound up with the notion of what it is to be that thing (unlike, for example, Socrates being such that there are infinitely many primes). | |
From: report of Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994]) by Adolph Rami - Essential vs Accidental Properties §2 | |
A reaction: I would think that Fine is so obviously right that it was hardly worth saying, but philosophers are a funny lot, and are quite likely to claim that features of prime numbers are part of the essence of a long-dead philosopher. |
10936 | Essential properties are part of an object's 'definition' [Fine,K, by Rami] |
Full Idea: According to Fine's definitional characterization of essential properties, they are those of an object's properties that are part of the object's 'definition'. | |
From: report of Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994]) by Adolph Rami - Essential vs Accidental Properties §2 | |
A reaction: This demands not just an account of what a definition is, but also the notion that there is only one fixed and correct definition (since the object presumably only has one essence) - but there seems to be something relative about a good definition. |
11165 | If Socrates lacks necessary existence, then his nature cannot require his parents' existence [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: If there is nothing in the nature of Socrates which demands that he exists, then presumably there is nothing in the nature of Socrates which demands that his parents exist. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 6) | |
A reaction: This sounds conclusive to me, against any claim that Socrates necessarily had those parents, if the claim is based on the identity or esssence of Socrates. |
3888 | Hume assumes that necessity can only be de dicto, not de re [Scruton] |
Full Idea: It was one of the assumptions of Hume's empiricism that all necessities are de dicto: i.e. they are artefacts of language. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 13.5) |
11166 | The subject of a proposition need not be the source of its necessity [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: We naturally suppose, if a subject-predicate proposition is necessary, that the subject of the proposition is the source of the necessity. But that singleton 2 contains 2 is necessary, whether the number or the set is the subject of the proposition. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 9) | |
A reaction: A very nice addition to his general attack on the idea that essence should be accounted for in terms of his necessity. He asks a beautifully simple question: for each necessity that we accept, what is the source of that necessity? |
11169 | Conceptual necessities rest on the nature of all concepts [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: Conceptual (and logical) necessities can be taken to be the propositions which are true in virtue of the nature of all concepts (or just the logical concepts). | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 9-10) | |
A reaction: The idea that something might be true simply because of the nature of a concept sounds good, and a slightly better formulation than traditional accounts of analytic truth. |
11162 | Socrates is necessarily distinct from the Eiffel Tower, but that is not part of his essence [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: It is necessary that Socrates and the Eiffel Tower be distinct. But it is not essential to Socrates that he be distinct from the Tower, for there is nothing in his nature which connects him in any special way to it. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 5) | |
A reaction: I find this simple argument very persuasive in separating out necessary facts about an object from the essence of that object. |
11168 | Metaphysical necessities are true in virtue of the nature of all objects [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: The metaphysically necessary truths can be identified with the propositions which are true in virtue of the nature of all objects whatever. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p. 9) | |
A reaction: This is part of Fine's proposal that necessities are derived from the essences or natures of things, which view I find very congenial. |
3903 | The conceivable can't be a test of the possible, if there are things which are possible but inconceivable [Scruton] |
Full Idea: If there are things which are possible but inconceivable, we must abandon the view, which has had a considerable following since Descartes, that the conceivable is a test of the possible. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 25) |
3897 | Epistemology is about the justification of belief, not the definition of knowledge [Scruton] |
Full Idea: In my view the concept of knowledge is of no very great interest in epistemology, which actually concerns the justification of belief. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 22) | |
A reaction: I think this is an excellent thought. I see knowledge as slippery, and partially contextual, and I don't care whether someone precisely 'knows' something. I just want to know why they believe it. |
3881 | In the Cogito argument consciousness develops into self-consciousness [Scruton] |
Full Idea: In the course of the argument the first person has acquired a character; he is not merely conscious, but self-conscious. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 4) |
3887 | Maybe our knowledge of truth and causation is synthetic a priori [Scruton] |
Full Idea: 'Every event has a cause' and 'truth is correspondence to facts' are candidates for being synthetic a priori knowledge. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 13.2) |
3901 | Touch only seems to reveal primary qualities [Scruton] |
Full Idea: Touch seems to deliver a purely primary-quality account of the world. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 24) | |
A reaction: Interesting, though a little over-confident. It seems occasionally possible for touch to be an illusion. |
3885 | We only conceive of primary qualities as attached to secondary qualities [Scruton] |
Full Idea: Bradley argued that we cannot conceive of primary qualities except as attached to secondary qualities. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 10.1) |
3910 | If primary and secondary qualities are distinct, what has the secondary qualities? [Scruton] |
Full Idea: If primary and secondary qualities are distinct, what do secondary qualities inhere in? | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], Ch.10 n) | |
A reaction: What is the problem? A pin causes me pain, but I know the pain isn't in the pin. It is the same with colour. It is a mental property, if you like, triggered by a wavelength of radiation. |
3899 | The representational theory says perceptual states are intentional states [Scruton] |
Full Idea: The representational theory is the unsurprising view that perceptual states are intentional, like beliefs, emotions and desires. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 23.3) |
3898 | My belief that it will rain tomorrow can't be caused by its raining tomorrow [Scruton] |
Full Idea: It is impossible that my present belief that it will rain tomorrow is caused by its raining tomorrow. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 22.4) | |
A reaction: This doesn't demolish a causal account of belief. It would be very surprising if I were to believe it was going to rain tomorrow for no cause whatsoever. That would be irrational. |
3880 | Logical positivism avoids scepticism, by closing the gap between evidence and conclusion [Scruton] |
Full Idea: If the evidence for p is q, and that is the only evidence there is or can be, then 'p' means q. Hence there is no gap between evidence and conclusion, and the sceptical problem does not arise. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 3.2) |
3878 | Why should you believe someone who says there are no truths? [Scruton] |
Full Idea: A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is 'merely relative', is asking you not to believe him. So don't. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 1.1) |
3892 | Every event having a cause, and every event being determined by its cause, are not the same [Scruton] |
Full Idea: To say that every event has a cause is one thing; to say that every event is determined by its cause is quite another thing. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 17.1) |
3911 | The very concept of a substance denies the possibility of mutual interaction and dependence [Scruton] |
Full Idea: It is often held to be a consequence of the rationalist conception of substance, that separate substances cannot interact (since causal interaction is a form of mutual dependence). | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], Ch.16 n) | |
A reaction: Yes, substances seem incapable of interaction, just as Leibniz argues that perfections could never interact. They are too pure. |
11170 | Analytic truth may only be true in virtue of the meanings of certain terms [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: Just as a necessary truth may be true in virtue of the identity of certain objects as opposed to others, so an analytic truth may be true in virtue of the meanings of certain terms as opposed to others (such as 'bachelor' rather than 'unmarried'). | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p.10) | |
A reaction: This is a beautifully simple observation, that the necessity of 'bachelors are unmarried men' derives from part of the proposition, not from the whole of it. So what is it about the part that generates the apparent necessity? The nature of the concept! |
11172 | The meaning of 'bachelor' is irrelevant to the meaning of 'unmarried man' [Fine,K] |
Full Idea: Strictly speaking it is irrelevant to the meaning of 'bachelor' that the phrase 'unmarried man' means what it does. | |
From: Kit Fine (Essence and Modality [1994], p.13) | |
A reaction: His point is that the necessary truth here derives from the meaning of 'bachelor', and not from the meaning of 'unmarried man'. But is also true that 'unmarried man' means 'bachelor' (for those familiar with the latter, but not the former). |
3882 | Wittgenstein makes it impossible to build foundations from something that is totally private [Scruton] |
Full Idea: Wittgenstein's point is that if I search for foundations in what can only be known to me, then the belief that I have discovered those foundations will also fall victim to Descartes' demon. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 5.3) | |
A reaction: Why should foundations based in wider society or a language community fare any better? Getting a lot of people to agree won't trouble the demon too much. Flat earthers. |
3896 | Any social theory of morality has the problem of the 'free rider', who only pretends to join in [Scruton] |
Full Idea: Any attempt to provide a social justification of morality runs the risk of the 'free rider' - one who pretends to play the game in order to enjoy the fruits of it. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 20.6) |
3886 | Membership is the greatest source of obligation [Scruton] |
Full Idea: Membership is the greatest source of obligation. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 11.2) | |
A reaction: An interesting and rather Aristotelian idea. The alternative is individual debt or obligation. |
3895 | The categorical imperative is not just individual, but can be used for negotiations between strangers [Scruton] |
Full Idea: The categorical imperative is also an instrument of negotiation and compromise between strangers, through which they can rise out of enmity and confront each other as equals. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 20.6) |
1748 | Archelaus was the first person to say that the universe is boundless [Archelaus, by Diog. Laertius] |
Full Idea: Archelaus was the first person to say that the universe is boundless. | |
From: report of Archelaus (fragments/reports [c.450 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 02.Ar.3 |
3890 | 'Cause' used to just mean any valid explanation [Scruton] |
Full Idea: Traditionally (before Leibniz and Spinoza) the world 'cause' signified any valid explanation. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 14) |
3904 | Measuring space requires no movement while I do it [Scruton] |
Full Idea: I can measure the length of something only if I know that it has not moved between the moment when I locate one end of it and the moment when I locate the other. | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 25.3) | |
A reaction: A nice example of how even simple propositions have many presuppositions. |
5989 | Archelaus said life began in a primeval slime [Archelaus, by Schofield] |
Full Idea: Archelaus wrote that life on Earth began in a primeval slime. | |
From: report of Archelaus (fragments/reports [c.450 BCE]) by Malcolm Schofield - Archelaus | |
A reaction: This sounds like a fairly clearcut assertion of the production of life by evolution. Darwin's contribution was to propose the mechanism for achieving it. We should honour the name of Archelaus for this idea. |
3905 | 'Existence' is not a predicate of 'man', but of the concept of man, saying it has at least one instance [Scruton] |
Full Idea: When I say that a man exists, Frege argues, I do not predicate existence of a man, but rather of the concept man: I say the concept has at least one instance (and existence is a predicate of predicates). | |
From: Roger Scruton (Modern Philosophy:introduction and survey [1994], 26.2) |