Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'On Motion', 'Lectures on Jurisprudence' and 'Classical Cosmology (frags)'

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


3 ideas

25. Social Practice / D. Justice / 2. The Law / d. Legal positivism
The existence of law is one thing, its merits and demerits another [Austin,J]
     Full Idea: The existence of law is one thing; its merit and demerit another. Whether it be or be not is one enquiry; whether it be or be not conformable to an assumed standard is a different enquiry.
     From: John Austin (Lectures on Jurisprudence [1858], p.214), quoted by Jens Zimmermann - Hermeneutics: a very short introduction 6 'Positivism'
     A reaction: It is impossible to contest this point, but the issue is whether there is nothing more to law than its written existence.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 1. Relativity / a. Special relativity
Motion is not absolute, but consists in relation [Leibniz]
     Full Idea: In reality motion is not something absolute, but consists in relation.
     From: Gottfried Leibniz (On Motion [1677], A6.4.1968), quoted by Daniel Garber - Leibniz:Body,Substance,Monad 3
     A reaction: It is often thought that motion being relative was invented by Einstein, but Leibniz wholeheartedly embraced 'Galilean relativity', and refused to even consider any absolute concept of motion. Acceleration is a bit trickier than velocity.
27. Natural Reality / E. Cosmology / 1. Cosmology
Is the cosmos open or closed, mechanical or teleological, alive or inanimate, and created or eternal? [Robinson,TM, by PG]
     Full Idea: The four major disputes in classical cosmology were whether the cosmos is 'open' or 'closed', whether it is explained mechanistically or teleologically, whether it is alive or mere matter, and whether or not it has a beginning.
     From: report of T.M. Robinson (Classical Cosmology (frags) [1997]) by PG - Db (ideas)
     A reaction: A nice summary. The standard modern view is closed, mechanistic, inanimate and non-eternal. But philosophers can ask deeper questions than physicists, and I say we are entitled to speculate when the evidence runs out.