Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Changes in Events and Changes in Things', 'A priori/A posteriori' and 'The Material Mind'

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

---

4 ideas

7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 8. Facts / b. Types of fact

15201	That Queen Anne is dead is a 'general fact', not a fact about Queen Anne [Prior,AN]
	Full Idea: The fact that Queen Anne has been dead for some years is not, in the strict sense of 'about', a fact about Queen Anne; it is not a fact about anyone or anything - it is a general fact.
	From: Arthur N. Prior (Changes in Events and Changes in Things [1968], p.13), quoted by Robin Le Poidevin - Past, Present and Future of Debate about Tense 1 b
	A reaction: He distinguishes 'general facts' (states of affairs, I think) from 'individual facts', involving some specific object. General facts seem to be what are expressed by negative existential truths, such as 'there is no Loch Ness Monster'. Useful.

12. Knowledge Sources / A. A Priori Knowledge / 10. A Priori as Subjective

3913	Maybe imagination is the source of a priori justification [Casullo]
	Full Idea: Some maintain that experiments in imagination are the source of a priori justification.
	From: Albert Casullo (A priori/A posteriori [1992], p.1)
	A reaction: What else could assessments of possibility and necessity be based on except imagination?

18. Thought / B. Mechanics of Thought / 1. Psychology

6386	In no important way can psychology be reduced to the physical sciences [Davidson]
	Full Idea: There is no important sense in which psychology can be reduced to the physical sciences.
	From: Donald Davidson (The Material Mind [1973], p.259)
	A reaction: In no 'important' way can the beauty of the Lake District be reduced to geology - but it is geology. 'Important' to whom? To a metaphysician, I would say psychology does reduce to physics, and that is important, but it is not important to a psychologist.

27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 2. Passage of Time / e. Tensed (A) series

22899	'Thank goodness that's over' is not like 'thank goodness that happened on Friday' [Prior,AN]
	Full Idea: One says 'thank goodness that is over', ..and it says something which it is impossible which any use of any tenseless copula with a date should convey. It certainly doesn't mean the same as 'thank goodness that occured on Friday June 15th 1954'.
	From: Arthur N. Prior (Changes in Events and Changes in Things [1968]), quoted by Adrian Bardon - Brief History of the Philosophy of Time 4 'Pervasive'
	A reaction: [Ref uncertain] This seems to be appealing to ordinary usage, in which tenses have huge significance. If we take time (with its past, present and future) as primitive, then tenses can have full weight. Did tenses mean anything at all to Einstein?