|
21757
|
Philosophy is the conceptual essence of the shape of history [Hegel]
|
|
Full Idea:
Philosophy is the supreme blossom - the concept - of the entire shape of history, the consciousness and the spiritual essence of the whole situation, the spirit of the age as the spirit present and aware of itself in thought.
|
|
From:
Georg W.F.Hegel (Lectures on the History of Philosophy [1830], p.25), quoted by Stephen Houlgate - An Introduction to Hegel 01
|
|
A reaction:
This sees philosophy as intrinsically historical, which is a founding idea for 'continental' philosophy. Analysis is tied to science, in which the history of the subject is seen as irrelevant to its truth. Does this mean we can't go back to Aristotle?
|
|
5500
|
Biologists see many organic levels, 'abstract' if seen from below, 'structural' if seen from above [Lycan]
|
|
Full Idea:
Biologists don't split living things into a 'structural' level and an 'abstract' level; ..rather, they are organised at many levels, each level 'abstract' with respect to those beneath it, but 'structural' as it realises those levels above it.
|
|
From:
William Lycan (Introduction - Ontology [1999], p.9)
|
|
A reaction:
This is a very helpful distinction. Compare Idea 4601. It seems to fit well with the 'homuncular' picture of a hierarchical mind, and explains why there are so many levels of description available for mental life.
|
|
5496
|
Functionalism has three linked levels: physical, functional, and mental [Lycan]
|
|
Full Idea:
Functionalism has three distinct levels of description: a neurophysiological description, a functional description (relative to a program which the brain is realising), and it may have a further mental description.
|
|
From:
William Lycan (Introduction - Ontology [1999], p.6)
|
|
A reaction:
I have always thought that the 'levels of description' idea was very helpful in describing the mind/brain. I feel certain that we are dealing with a single thing, so this is the only way we can account for the diverse ways in which we discuss it.
|
|
20883
|
Modern utilitarians value knowledge, friendship, autonomy, and achievement, as well as pleasure [Hooker,B]
|
|
Full Idea:
Most utilitarians now think that pleasure, even if construed widely, is not the only thing desirable in itself. ...Goods also include important knowledge, friendship, autonomy, achievement and so on.
|
|
From:
Brad W. Hooker (Rule Utilitarianism and Euthanasia [1997], 2)
|
|
A reaction:
That pleasure is desired is empirically verifiable, which certainly motivated Bentham. A string of other desirables each needs to be justified - but how? What would be the value of a 'friendship' if neither party got pleasure from it?
|
|
20885
|
Euthanasia is active or passive, and voluntary, non-voluntary or involuntary [Hooker,B]
|
|
Full Idea:
Six types of euthanasia: 1) Active voluntary (knowing my wishes), 2) Active non-voluntary (not knowing my wishes), 3) Active involuntary (against my wishes), 4) Passive voluntary, 5) Passive non-voluntary, 6) Passive involuntary.
|
|
From:
Brad W. Hooker (Rule Utilitarianism and Euthanasia [1997], 5)
|
|
A reaction:
'Active' is intervening, and 'passive' is not intervening. A helpful framework.
|
|
20882
|
Euthanasia may not involve killing, so it is 'killing or not saving, out of concern for that person' [Hooker,B]
|
|
Full Idea:
Passive euthanasia is arguably not killing, and the death involved is often painful, so let us take the term 'euthanasia' to mean 'either killing or passing up opportunities to save someone, out of concern for that person'.
|
|
From:
Brad W. Hooker (Rule Utilitarianism and Euthanasia [1997], 1)
|
|
A reaction:
This sounds good, and easily settled, until you think concern for that person could have two different outcomes, depending on whether the criteria are those of the decider or of the patient. Think of religious decider and atheist patient, or vice versa.
|