|
21099
|
People must have agreed to authority, because they are naturally equal, prior to education [Hume]
|
|
Full Idea:
When we consider how nearly equal all men are in their bodily force, and even in their mental powers and faculties, till cultivated by education, ...then nothing but their own consent could at first associate them together, and subject them to authority.
|
|
From:
David Hume (Of the original contract [1741], p.276)
|
|
A reaction:
This doesn't sound very convincing. Some people are much better suited than others to training and education. Men vary enormously in size.
|
|
20495
|
We no more give 'tacit assent' to the state than a passenger carried on board a ship while asleep [Hume]
|
|
Full Idea:
[If we give 'tacit' assent to the state] ...we may as well assert that a man, by remaining in a vessel, freely consents to the dominion of the master, though he was carried aboard while asleep.
|
|
From:
David Hume (Of the original contract [1741], p.283)
|
|
A reaction:
We should probably drop the whole idea that we give assent to the state. We are stuck with a state, and a few of us can escape, if it seems important enough, but most of us have no choice. He hope to assent to the controllers of the state.
|
|
6703
|
Poor people lack the knowledge or wealth to move to a different state [Hume]
|
|
Full Idea:
Can we seriously say, that a poor peasant or artisan has a free choice to leave his country, when he knows no foreign language or manners, and lives, from day to day, by the small wages that he acquires?
|
|
From:
David Hume (Of the original contract [1741], p.283)
|
|
A reaction:
Of course, in the nineteenth century the Scottish poor did, going to America, which welcomed the poor, and spoke English. Hume's point is the right reply to anyone who says 'If you don't like it, go elsewhere'. Also 'No! Change it!'
|
|
21102
|
We all know that the history of property is founded on injustices [Hume]
|
|
Full Idea:
Reason tells us that there is no property in durable objects, such as land or houses, when carefully examined in passing from hand to hand, but must, in some period, have been founded on fraud and injustice.
|
|
From:
David Hume (Of the original contract [1741], p.288)
|
|
A reaction:
A prime objection to Nozick, who fantasises about an initial position of just ownership, which can then be the subject of just contracts. In 1866 thousands of white people were granted land in the USA, but not a single black freed slave got anything.
|
|
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.
|
|
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!
|
|
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).
|