13 ideas
14965 | Truth rests on Elimination ('A' is true → A) and Introduction (A → 'A' is true) [Gupta] |
Full Idea: The basic principles governing truth are Truth Elimination (sentence A follows from ''A' is true') and the converse Truth Introduction (''A' is true' follows from A), which combine into Tarski's T-schema - 'A' is true if and only if A. | |
From: Anil Gupta (Truth [2001], 5.1) | |
A reaction: Introduction and Elimination rules are the basic components of natural deduction systems, so 'true' now works in the same way as 'and', 'or' etc. This is the logician's route into truth. |
14968 | A weakened classical language can contain its own truth predicate [Gupta] |
Full Idea: If a classical language is expressively weakened - for example, by dispensing with negation - then it can contain its own truth predicate. | |
From: Anil Gupta (Truth [2001], 5.2) | |
A reaction: Thus the Tarskian requirement to move to a metalanguage for truth is only a requirement of a reasonably strong language. Gupta uses this to criticise theories that dispense with the metalanguage. |
14964 | The Liar reappears, even if one insists on propositions instead of sentences [Gupta] |
Full Idea: There is the idea that the Liar paradox is solved simply by noting that truth is a property of propositions (not of sentences), and the Liar sentence does not express a proposition. But we then say 'I am not now expressing a true proposition'! | |
From: Anil Gupta (Truth [2001], 5.1) | |
A reaction: Disappointed to learn this, since I think focusing on propositions (which are unambiguous) rather than sentences solves a huge number of philosophical problems. |
14969 | Strengthened Liar: either this sentence is neither-true-nor-false, or it is not true [Gupta] |
Full Idea: An example of the Strengthened Liar is the following statement SL: 'Either SL is neither-true-nor-false or it is not true'. This raises a serious problem for any theory that assesses the paradoxes to be neither true nor false. | |
From: Anil Gupta (Truth [2001], 5.4.2) | |
A reaction: If the sentence is either true or false it reduces to the ordinary Liar. If it is neither true nor false, then it is true. |
19347 | Substance needs independence, unity, and stability (for individuation); also it is a subject, for predicates [Perkins] |
Full Idea: For individuation, substance needs three properties: independence, to separate it from other things; unity, to call it one thing, rather than an aggregate; and permanence or stability over time. Its other role is as subject for predicates. | |
From: Franklin Perkins (Leibniz: Guide for the Perplexed [2007], 3.1) | |
A reaction: Perkins is describing the Aristotelian view, which is taken up by Leibniz. 'Substance' is not a controversial idea, if we see that it only means that the world is full of 'things'. It is an unusual philosopher wholly totally denies that. |
3546 | 'Phronesis' should translate as 'practical intelligence', not as prudence [Annas] |
Full Idea: The best translation of 'phronesis' is probably not 'prudence' (which implies a non-moral motive), or 'practical wisdom' (which makes it sound contemplative), but 'practical intelligence', or just 'intelligence'. | |
From: Julia Annas (The Morality of Happiness [1993], 2.3) |
3547 | Epicureans achieve pleasure through character development [Annas] |
Full Idea: Since having a virtue does not reduce to performing certain kinds of acts, the Epicurean will achieve pleasure only by aiming at being a certain kind of person. | |
From: Julia Annas (The Morality of Happiness [1993], 2.4) | |
A reaction: No Epicurean would want to merely possess virtues, without enacting them. I assume that virtues are sought as guides to finding the finest pleasures (such as friendship). |
3543 | Cyrenaics pursue pleasure, but don't equate it with happiness [Annas] |
Full Idea: Cyrenaics claimed our final good was pleasure, best achieved by seeking maximum intensity of pleasurable experiences, but they explicitly admitted that this was not happiness. | |
From: Julia Annas (The Morality of Happiness [1993], 1) |
3541 | Ancient ethics uses attractive notions, not imperatives [Annas] |
Full Idea: Instead of modern 'imperative' notions of ethics (involving obligation, duty and rule-following), ancient ethics uses 'attractive' notions like those of goodness and worth | |
From: Julia Annas (The Morality of Happiness [1993], Intro) |
3550 | Principles cover life as a whole, where rules just cover actions [Annas] |
Full Idea: Principles concern not just types of actions, but one's life as a whole, grasping truths about the nature of justice, and the like; they explain rules, giving the 'why' and not just the 'what'. | |
From: Julia Annas (The Morality of Happiness [1993], 2.4) |
3551 | Virtue theory tries to explain our duties in terms of our character [Annas] |
Full Idea: An ethics of virtue moves from an initial interest in what we ought to do to an interest in the kinds of people we are and hope to be, because the latter is taken to be the best way of understanding the former. | |
From: Julia Annas (The Morality of Happiness [1993], 2.5) |
3552 | If excessively good actions are admirable but not required, then duty isn't basic [Annas] |
Full Idea: Supererogatory actions are admirable and valuable, and we praise people for doing them, but they do not generate obligations to perform them, which casts doubt on obligation as the basic notion in ethics. | |
From: Julia Annas (The Morality of Happiness [1993], 2.6) |
3542 | We should do good when necessary, not maximise it [Annas] |
Full Idea: Why should I want to maximise my acting courageously? I act courageously when it is required. | |
From: Julia Annas (The Morality of Happiness [1993], 1) |