Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Leibniz: Guide for the Perplexed', 'Intellectual Norms and Foundations of Mind' and 'Intro to 'Communitarianism and Individualism''

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

---

7 ideas

9. Objects / B. Unity of Objects / 2. Substance / d. Substance defined

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.

24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 6. Liberalism / a. Liberalism basics

22808	Liberalism is minimal government, or individual rights, or equality [Avineri/De-Shalit]
	Full Idea: Liberalism has been defended as a theory of minimal government, or as a theory of basic individual rights, or as an egalitarian philosophy.
	From: Avineri,S/De-Shalit,A (Intro to 'Communitarianism and Individualism' [1992], §5)
	A reaction: Minimal government tends towards anarchist liberalism, but then what grounds the right to be free of government? Presumably any sensible theory of rights has to be egalitarian. What could ground unequal rights?

24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 6. Liberalism / g. Liberalism critique

22803	Can individualist theories justify an obligation to fight in a war? [Avineri/De-Shalit]
	Full Idea: How can an individualist theory justify an obligation to fight for the state in the case of war?
	From: Avineri,S/De-Shalit,A (Intro to 'Communitarianism and Individualism' [1992], §4)
	A reaction: The most dramatic example of obliging citizens to contribute to the state, the notable other case being taxes. Some imagined ancient 'social contract' doesn't seem sufficient for later generations. Does being naturally sociable create such obligations?

24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 7. Communitarianism / a. Communitarianism

22804	Autonomy is better achieved within a community [Avineri/De-Shalit]
	Full Idea: Communitarians often argue that personal autonomy is better achieved within the community.
	From: Avineri,S/De-Shalit,A (Intro to 'Communitarianism and Individualism' [1992], §4)
	A reaction: Hegel is the source of this view. The simplest version of the point is that autonomy can only be asserted if a person has rights, which can be asserted and defended, and only a society can provide that. That is plausible.

22806	Communitarians avoid oppression for the common good, by means of small mediating communities [Avineri/De-Shalit]
	Full Idea: Because of the mediating structures of small communities, communitarians are less fearful [than liberals] of the emergence of an oppressive government as a result of the politics of the common good.
	From: Avineri,S/De-Shalit,A (Intro to 'Communitarianism and Individualism' [1992], §5)
	A reaction: A politics of the common good has an obvious implicit conservatism because the central consensus is always likely to disapprove of errant individuals, of all sorts. Only individual rights can block an oppressive government.

24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 7. Communitarianism / b. Against communitarianism

22807	If our values are given to us by society then we have no grounds to criticise them [Avineri/De-Shalit]
	Full Idea: If communitarians are right that we are not free to choose, but rather that our values are determined by our community, the individualists say, then there is no reason to criticise the values of one's society.
	From: Avineri,S/De-Shalit,A (Intro to 'Communitarianism and Individualism' [1992], §5)
	A reaction: This is an obvious challenge, but if one's concept of community is a forum for free debate then it can be overcome. There is no avoiding the fact, though, that a good community always needs a high degree of consensus.

26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 7. Strictness of Laws

14349	If there are no finks or antidotes at the fundamental level, the laws can't be ceteris paribus [Burge, by Corry]
	Full Idea: Bird argues that there are no finks at the fundamental level, and unlikely to be any antidotes. It then follows that laws at the fundamental level will all be strict - not ceteris paribus - laws.
	From: report of Tyler Burge (Intellectual Norms and Foundations of Mind [1986]) by Richard Corry - Dispositional Essentialism Grounds Laws of Nature? 3
	A reaction: [Bird's main target is Nancy Cartwright 1999] This is a nice line of argument. Isn't part of the ceteris paribus problem that two fundamental laws might interfere with one another?