Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'works', 'works' and 'Causation in a Physical World'

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

6 ideas

6. Mathematics / B. Foundations for Mathematics / 3. Axioms for Geometry
13007 Archimedes defined a straight line as the shortest distance between two points [Archimedes, by Leibniz]
     Full Idea: Archimedes gave a sort of definition of 'straight line' when he said it is the shortest line between two points.
     From: report of Archimedes (fragments/reports [c.240 BCE]) by Gottfried Leibniz - New Essays on Human Understanding 4.13
     A reaction: Commentators observe that this reduces the purity of the original Euclidean axioms, because it involves distance and measurement, which are absent from the purest geometry.
23. Ethics / C. Virtue Theory / 3. Virtues / d. Courage
15640 Courage is not a virtue, but the form of every virtue at its testing point [Lewis,CS]
     Full Idea: Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.
     From: C.S. Lewis (works [1950])
     A reaction: This appeared on Twitter, without mention of its source. Adding it breaks my normal rules, but I hope you agree that it is too good to miss. Is not even resolutely facing up to suffering or death a case of genuine courage? Determination, prioritisation?
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 1. Causation
8404 Explain single events by general rules, or vice versa, or probability explains both, or they are unconnected [Field,H]
     Full Idea: Some think singular causal claims should be explained in terms of general causal claims; some think the order should be reversed; some think a third thing (e.g. objective probability) will explain both; and some think they are only loosely connected.
     From: Hartry Field (Causation in a Physical World [2003], 2)
     A reaction: I think Ducasse gives the best account, which is the second option, of giving singular causal claims priority. Probability (Mellor) strikes me as a non-starter, and the idea that they are fairly independent seems rather implausible.
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 5. Direction of causation
8401 Physical laws are largely time-symmetric, so they make a poor basis for directional causation [Field,H]
     Full Idea: It is sometimes pointed out that (perhaps with a few minor exceptions) the fundamental physical laws are completely time-symmetric. If so, then if one is inclined to found causation on fundamental physical law, it isn't evident how directionality gets in.
     From: Hartry Field (Causation in a Physical World [2003], 1)
     A reaction: All my instincts tell me that causation is more fundamental than laws, and that directionality is there at the start. That, though, raises the nice question of how, if causation explains laws, the direction eventually gets left OUT!
8400 Identifying cause and effect is not just conventional; we explain later events by earlier ones [Field,H]
     Full Idea: It is not just that the earlier member of a cause-effect pair is conventionally called the cause; it is also connected with other temporal asymmetries that play an important role in our practices. We tend to explain later events in terms of earlier ones.
     From: Hartry Field (Causation in a Physical World [2003], 1)
     A reaction: We also interfere with the earlier one to affect the later one, and not vice versa (Idea 8363). I am inclined to think that attempting to explain the direction of causation is either pointless or hopeless.
8402 The only reason for adding the notion of 'cause' to fundamental physics is directionality [Field,H]
     Full Idea: Although it is true that the notion of 'cause' is not needed in fundamental physics, even statistical physics, still directionality considerations don't preclude this notion from being consistently added to fundamental physics.
     From: Hartry Field (Causation in a Physical World [2003], 1)
     A reaction: This only makes sense if the notion of cause already has directionality built into it, which I think is correct. The physicist might reply that they don't care about directionality, but the whole idea of an experiment seems to depend on it (Idea 8363).