Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Counterpart theory and Quant. Modal Logic', 'Perception' and 'The Periodic Table'

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


43 ideas

9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 1. Essences of Objects
Aristotelian essentialism says essences are not relative to specification [Lewis]
     Full Idea: So-called 'Aristotelian essentialism' is the doctrine of essences not relative to specifications.
     From: David Lewis (Counterpart theory and Quant. Modal Logic [1968], III)
     A reaction: In other words, they are so-called 'real essences', understood as de re. Quine says essences are all de dicto, and relative to some specification. I vote for Aristotle.
10. Modality / A. Necessity / 7. Natural Necessity
Causal necessities hold in all worlds compatible with the laws of nature [Lewis]
     Full Idea: Just as a sentence is necessary if it holds in all worlds, so it is causally necessary if it holds in all worlds compatible with the laws of nature.
     From: David Lewis (Counterpart theory and Quant. Modal Logic [1968], V)
     A reaction: I don't believe in the so-called 'laws of nature', so I'm not buying that. Is there no distinction in Lewis's view between those sentences which must hold, and those which happen to hold universally?
10. Modality / E. Possible worlds / 3. Transworld Objects / b. Rigid designation
It doesn't take the whole of a possible Humphrey to win the election [Lewis]
     Full Idea: Even if Humphrey is a modal continuant, it doesn't take the whole of him to do such things as winning.
     From: David Lewis (Counterpart theory and Quant. Modal Logic [1968], Post B)
     A reaction: This responds to Kripke's famous example, that people only care about what happens to themselves, and not to some 'counterpart' of themselves.
10. Modality / E. Possible worlds / 3. Transworld Objects / c. Counterparts
Counterpart theory is bizarre, as no one cares what happens to a mere counterpart [Kripke on Lewis]
     Full Idea: Probably Humphrey could not care less whether someone else, no matter how much resembling him, would have been victorious in another possible world. Thus Lewis's view seems even more bizarre that the usual transworld identification it replaces.
     From: comment on David Lewis (Counterpart theory and Quant. Modal Logic [1968]) by Saul A. Kripke - Naming and Necessity notes and addenda note 13
     A reaction: I begin to see this as a devastating reply to a theory I previously found quite congenial.
Counterparts are not the original thing, but resemble it more than other things do [Lewis]
     Full Idea: Your counterparts resemble you closely in content and context in important respects. They resemble you more closely than do the other things in their worlds. But they are not really you.
     From: David Lewis (Counterpart theory and Quant. Modal Logic [1968], I)
     A reaction: It is a dilemma. If my counterpart were exactly me, I couldn't contemplate possibly losing a leg, or my sanity. But if my counterpart isn't exactly me, then I don't have much interest in its fate. Only essences can save us here. Cf. me tomorrow.
If the closest resembler to you is in fact quite unlike you, then you have no counterpart [Lewis]
     Full Idea: If whatever thing in world w6 it is that resembles you more closely than anything else in w6 is nevertheless quite unlike you; nothing in w6 resembles you at all closely. If so, you have no counterpart in w6.
     From: David Lewis (Counterpart theory and Quant. Modal Logic [1968], I)
     A reaction: This is the nub, because the whole theory rests on deciding whether two things resemble sufficiently 'closely'. But then we need a criterion of closeness, so we must start talking about which properties matter. Essences loom.
Essential attributes are those shared with all the counterparts [Lewis]
     Full Idea: An essential attribute of something is an attribute it shares with all its counterparts.
     From: David Lewis (Counterpart theory and Quant. Modal Logic [1968], III)
     A reaction: I don't like this. It ties essence entirely to identity, but I think essence precedes identity. Essence is a nexus of causal and explanatory powers which bestows an identity on each thing. But essence might be unstable, and identity with it.
11. Knowledge Aims / A. Knowledge / 6. Knowing How
Ryle's dichotomy between knowing how and knowing that is too simplistic [Maund]
     Full Idea: There is a convincing claim that we need to leave behind Ryle's dichotomy between knowing how and knowing that as being too simplistic.
     From: Barry Maund (Perception [2003], Ch. 2)
     A reaction: [John Campbell is mentioned as source of this idea] I find this proposal immediately appealing. I was taught that riding a bicycle shows the division, as hardly anyone knows the theory, but I am sure children need some propositional information.
12. Knowledge Sources / B. Perception / 1. Perception
Perception is sensation-then-concept, or direct-concepts, or sensation-saturated-in-concepts [Maund]
     Full Idea: Three forms of (cognitive) direct realism are: two stages - non-conceptual sensory experience, then a non-sensory conceptual state; directly acquiring non-sensuous conceptual states; and sensuous states saturated with concepts.
     From: Barry Maund (Perception [2003], Ch. 3)
     A reaction: [First: Reid, Dretske, Evans, Sellars. Second: Armstrong, Heil, Pitcher, Clark. Third: Kant, McDowell, Strawson, McGinn, Searle]. I find the first one plausible, because of the ambiguity in language, and because unusual experiences separate them.
12. Knowledge Sources / B. Perception / 4. Sense Data / a. Sense-data theory
Sense-data have an epistemological purpose (foundations) and a metaphysical purpose (explanation) [Maund]
     Full Idea: Sense-data have an epistemological purpose (to serve as foundations on which the edifice of knowledge is to be constructed), and a metaphysical purpose (to provide an accurate account of the phenomenology of perceptual experience).
     From: Barry Maund (Perception [2003], Ch. 6)
     A reaction: This is very important, because there is a real danger (e.g. in Russell) that the epistemological convenience of sense-data for giving reliability in knowledge means that we are too quick in making the assumption that they actually exist.
12. Knowledge Sources / B. Perception / 6. Inference in Perception
One thesis says we are not aware of qualia, but only of objects and their qualities [Maund]
     Full Idea: The representationalist/intentionalist thesis about perception is that we are not aware of the intrinsic qualities of experience in normal perception; we are instead aware of those objects and their qualities that are specified in the content.
     From: Barry Maund (Perception [2003], Ch. 9)
     A reaction: If secondary qualities are in the mind, not in objects, how come people always thought they were in objects? Answer: because this thesis is right? The primary mode of the mind is projected outwards, though we can introspect about colours. [Dretske]
The Myth of the Given claims that thought is rationally supported by non-conceptual experiences [Maund]
     Full Idea: The so-called 'myth of the given' is the view that conceptual content can be rationally supported by experiences construed as states with non-conceptual content.
     From: Barry Maund (Perception [2003], Ch.10)
     A reaction: The myth is attacked by Sellars and McDowell, the latter claiming that concepts must be embedded in the experiences. Maybe only realism is required to make the Given work. The experiences are definitely of something, and off we go...
12. Knowledge Sources / B. Perception / 8. Adverbial Theory
Mountains are adverbial modifications of the earth, but still have object-characteristics [Maund]
     Full Idea: Metaphysically, mountains are only adverbial modifications of the Earth's belt. They have no existence independent of being part of the earth. Yet for all that, they have some rather strong 'object'-characteristics.
     From: Barry Maund (Perception [2003], Ch.10)
     A reaction: The point being that you don't give up all the advantages of a sense-data view if you switch to adverbialism. I'm not convinced by the analogy, but we can only be aware of adverbial qualities if they have causal powers.
Adverbialism tries to avoid sense-data and preserve direct realism [Maund]
     Full Idea: The two primary motivations of the adverbialist analysis are thought to be to avoid commitment to sensory particulars such as sense-data, and to allow us to hold on to a version of direct realism.
     From: Barry Maund (Perception [2003], Ch.10)
     A reaction: Maund says that the adverbialist's fears about indirect/representative theories are unfounded. My feeling is that neither account will do the job properly once we get a better account of consciousness. Maybe adverbialism is only for secondary qualities.
14. Science / A. Basis of Science / 4. Prediction
If a theory can be fudged, so can observations [Scerri]
     Full Idea: A theorist may have designed his theory to fit the facts, but is it not equally possible for observers to be influenced by a theory in their report of experimental facts?
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 05 'Power')
     A reaction: This is in reply to Lipton's claim that prediction is better than accommodation because of the 'fudging' problem. The reply is that you might fudge to achieve a prediction. If it was correct, that wouldn't avoid the charge of fudging.
14. Science / B. Scientific Theories / 4. Paradigm
The periodic system is the big counterexample to Kuhn's theory of revolutionary science [Scerri]
     Full Idea: The history of the periodic system appears to be the supreme counterexample to Kuhn's thesis, whereby scientific developments proceed in a sudden, revolutionary fashion.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 03 'Rapid')
     A reaction: What is lovely about the periodic table is that it seems so wonderfully right, and hence no revolution has ever been needed. The big theories of physics and cosmology are much more precarious.
14. Science / D. Explanation / 1. Explanation / b. Aims of explanation
Scientists eventually seek underlying explanations for every pattern [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Whenever scientists are presented with a useful pattern or system of classification, it is only a matter of time before the begin to ask whether there may be some underlying explanation for the pattern.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], Intro 'Evol')
     A reaction: Music to my ears, against the idea that the sole aim of science is accurately describe the patterns.
14. Science / D. Explanation / 3. Best Explanation / a. Best explanation
The periodic table suggests accommodation to facts rates above prediction [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Rather than proving the value of prediction, the development and acceptance of the periodic table may give us a powerful illustration of the importance of accommodation, that is, the ability of a new scientific theory to explain already known facts.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 05 'Intro')
     A reaction: The original table made famous predictions, but also just as many wrong ones (Scerri:143), and Scerri thinks this aspect has been overrated.
18. Thought / C. Content / 1. Content
Thought content is either satisfaction conditions, or exercise of concepts [Maund, by PG]
     Full Idea: The content of thought can either be expressed as satisfaction conditions (e.g. truth-conditions for beliefs), or as the exercise of at least two concepts.
     From: report of Barry Maund (Perception [2003], Ch. 8) by PG - Db (ideas)
     A reaction: I think I favour the first view, because not all conjunctions of concepts would count as thoughts (e.g. rhubarb-plus-contradiction). A bunch of concepts becomes a thought when it connects in some way to reality?
26. Natural Theory / B. Natural Kinds / 1. Natural Kinds
Natural kinds are what are differentiated by nature, and not just by us [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Natural kinds are realistic scientific entities that are differentiated by nature itself rather than by our human attempts at classification.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], Intro 'Evol')
If elements are natural kinds, might the groups of the periodic table also be natural kinds? [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Elements defined by their atomic numbers are frequently assumed to represent 'natural kinds' in chemistry. ...The question arises as to whether groups of elements appearing in the periodic table might also represent natural kinds.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 10 'Elements')
     A reaction: Scerri says the distinction is not as sharp as that between the elements. As a realist, he believes there is 'one ideal periodic classification', which would then make the periods into kinds.
26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 8. Scientific Essentialism / a. Scientific essentialism
The colour of gold is best explained by relativistic effects due to fast-moving inner-shell electrons [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Many seemingly mundane properties of elements such as the characteristic color of gold ....can best be explained by relativistic effects due to fast-moving inner-shell electrons.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 01 'Under')
     A reaction: John Locke - I wish you were reading this! That we could work out the hidden facts of gold, and thereby explain and predict the surface properties we experience, is exactly what Locke thought to be forever impossible.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 4. Standard Model / a. Concept of matter
The stability of nuclei can be estimated through their binding energy [Scerri]
     Full Idea: The stability of nuclei can be estimated through their binding energy, a quantity given by the difference between their masses and the masses of their constituent particles.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 10 'Stabil')
If all elements are multiples of one (of hydrogen), that suggests once again that matter is unified [Scerri]
     Full Idea: The work of Moseley and others rehabilitated Prout's hypothesis that all elements were composites of hydrogen, being exact multiples of 1. ..This revitalized some philososophical notions of the unity of all matter, criticised by Mendeleev and others.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 06 'Philos')
27. Natural Reality / F. Chemistry / 1. Chemistry
The electron is the main source of chemical properties [Scerri]
     Full Idea: It is the electron that is mainly responsible for the chemical properties of the elements.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 06 'Intro')
A big chemistry idea is that covalent bonds are shared electrons, not transfer of electrons [Scerri]
     Full Idea: One of the most influential ideas in modern chemistry is of a covalent bond as a shared pair of electrons (not as transfer of electrons and the formation of ionic bonds).
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 08 'Intro')
     A reaction: Gilbert Newton Lewis was responsible for this.
How can poisonous elements survive in the nutritious compound they compose? [Scerri]
     Full Idea: A central mystery of chemistry is how the elements survive in the compounds they form. For example, how can poisonous grey metal sodium combine with green poisonous gas chlorine, to make salt, which is non-poisonous and essential for life?
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], Intro 'Elem')
     A reaction: A very nice question which had never occurred to me. If our digestive system pulled the sodium apart from the chlorine, we would die.
Periodicity and bonding are the two big ideas in chemistry [Scerri]
     Full Idea: The two big ideas in chemistry are chemical periodicity and chemical bonding, and they are deeply interconnected.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], Intro 'Per')
Chemistry does not work from general principles, but by careful induction from large amounts of data [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Unlike in physics, chemical reasoning does not generally proceed unambiguously from general principles. It is a more inductive science in which large amounts of observational data must be carefully weighed.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 05 'Mendel')
     A reaction: This is why essentialist thinking was important for Mendeleev, because it kept his focus on the core facts beneath the messy and incomplete data.
Does radioactivity show that only physics can explain chemistry? [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Some authors believe that the interpretation of the properties of the elements passed from chemistry to physics as a result of the discovery of radioactivity. ...I believe this view to be overly reductionist.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 06 'Radio')
     A reaction: It is all a matter of the explanations, and how far down they have to go. If most non-radiocative chemistry doesn't need to mention the physics, then chemistry is largely autonomous.
27. Natural Reality / F. Chemistry / 2. Modern Elements
It is now thought that all the elements have literally evolved from hydrogen [Scerri]
     Full Idea: The elements are now believed to have literally evolved from hydrogen by various mechanisms.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 10 'Evol)
19th C views said elements survived abstractly in compounds, but also as 'material ingredients' [Scerri]
     Full Idea: In the 19th century abstract elements were believed to be permanent and responsible for observed properties in compounds, but (departing from Aristotle) they were also 'material ingredients', thus linking the metaphysical and material realm.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 04 'Nature')
     A reaction: I'm not sure I can make sense of this gulf between the metaphysical and the material realm, so this was an account heading for disaster.
27. Natural Reality / F. Chemistry / 3. Periodic Table
Moseley, using X-rays, showed that atomic number ordered better than atomic weight [Scerri]
     Full Idea: By using X-rays, Henry Moseley later discovered that a better ordering principle for the periodic system is atomic numbers rather than atomic weight, by subjecting many different elements to bombardment.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 06 'Intro')
     A reaction: Moseley was killed in the First World War at the age of 26. It is interesting that they more or less worked out the whole table, before they discovered the best principle on which to found it.
Some suggested basing the new periodic table on isotopes, not elements [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Some chemists even suggested that the periodic table would have to be abandoned in favor of a classification system that included a separate place for every single isotope.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 06 'Intro')
     A reaction: The extreme case is tin, which has 21 isotopes, so is tin a fundamental, or is each of the isotopes a fundamental? Does there have to be a right answer to that? All tin isotopes basically react in the same way, so we stick with the elements table.
Elements are placed in the table by the number of positive charges - the atomic number [Scerri]
     Full Idea: The serial number of an element in the periodic table, its atomic number, corresponds to the number of positive charges in the atom.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 07 'Models')
     A reaction: Note that this is a feature of the nucleus, despite that fact that the electrons decide the chemical properties. A nice model for Locke's views on essentialism.
Elements in the table are grouped by having the same number of outer-shell electrons [Scerri]
     Full Idea: The modern notion is that atoms fall into the same group of the periodic table if they possess the same numbers of outer-shell electrons.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 07 'Quantum')
     A reaction: Scerri goes on to raise questions about this, on p.242. By this principle helium should be an alkaline earth element, but it isn't.
Orthodoxy says the periodic table is explained by quantum mechanics [Scerri]
     Full Idea: The prevailing reductionist climate implies that quantum mechanics inevitably provides a more fundamental explanation for the periodic system.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 08 'Concl')
     A reaction: Scerri has argued that chemists did much better than physicists in working out how the outer electron shells of atoms worked, by induction from data, rather than inference from basic principles.
Pauli explained the electron shells, but not the lengths of the periods in the table [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Pauli explained the maximum number of electrons successive shells can accommodate, ...but it does not explain the lengths of the periods, which is the really crucial property of the periodic table.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 07 'Pauli')
     A reaction: Paulis' Exclusion Principle says no two electrons in an atom can have the same set of four quantum numbers. He added 'spin' as a fourth number. It means 'electrons cannot be distinguished' (243). Scerri says the big problem is still not fully explained.
Elements were ordered by equivalent weight; later by atomic weight; finally by atomic number [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Historically, the ordering of elements across periods was determined by equivalent weight, then later by atomic weight, and eventually by atomic number.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 01 'React')
     A reaction: So they used to be ordered by quantities (measured by real numbers), but eventually were ordered by unit items (counted by natural numbers). There need to be distinct protons (unified) to be counted.
The best classification needs the deepest and most general principles of the atoms [Scerri]
     Full Idea: An optimal classification can be obtained by identifying the deepest and most general principles that govern the atoms of the elements.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 10 'Continuum')
     A reaction: He adds (p.286) that the best system will add the 'greatest degree of regularity' to these best principles.
To explain the table, quantum mechanics still needs to explain order of shell filling [Scerri]
     Full Idea: The order of shell filling has not yet been deduced from first principles, and this issue cannot be avoided if one is to really ask whether quantum mechanics explains the periodic system in a fundamental manner.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 09 'From')
Since 99.96% of the universe is hydrogen and helium, the periodic table hardly matters [Scerri]
     Full Idea: All the elements other than hydrogen and helium make up just 0.04% of the universe. Seen from this perspective, the periodic table appears to rather insignificant.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 10 'Astro')
Moseley showed the elements progress in units, and thereby clearly identified the gaps [Scerri]
     Full Idea: Moseley's work showed that the successive elements in the periodic table have an atomic number greater by one unit. The gaps could then be identified definitively, as 43, 61, 72, 75, 85, 87, and 91.
     From: Eric R. Scerri (The Periodic Table [2007], 06 'Henry')
     A reaction: [compressed]