Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'fragments/reports', 'On Plural Reference and Set Theory' and 'Interview with Baggini and Stangroom'

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

4 ideas

5. Theory of Logic / F. Referring in Logic / 1. Naming / d. Singular terms
10670 A 'singulariser' converts a plural like 'number of' to a syntactically neutral form [Cartwright,H, by Hossack]
     Full Idea: Helen Cartwright calls 'a number of' a 'singulariser', an expression whose linguistic function is to convert to a syntactically neutral form an expression whose semantic value remains plural. It is a great convenience grammatically.
     From: report of Helen Cartwright (On Plural Reference and Set Theory [1993]) by Keith Hossack - Plurals and Complexes 2
     A reaction: Compare Hofweber's Idea 10004, suggesting it is a crucial psychological convenience for reasoning, as well as a 'grammatical' convenience.
13. Knowledge Criteria / E. Relativism / 2. Knowledge as Convention
1556 By nature people are close to one another, but culture drives them apart [Hippias]
     Full Idea: I regard you all as relatives - by nature, not by convention. By nature like is akin to like, but convention is a tyrant over humankind and often constrains people to act contrary to nature.
     From: Hippias (fragments/reports [c.430 BCE]), quoted by Plato - Protagoras 337c8
22. Metaethics / C. The Good / 1. Goodness / g. Consequentialism
6853 Consequentialism wrongly assumes a clear line between an act and its consequences [Crisp,R]
     Full Idea: What is wrong with consequentialism is that it assumes that there is agreement about when an act ends and when its consequences begin.
     From: Roger Crisp (Interview with Baggini and Stangroom [2001], p.31)
     A reaction: I certainly agree that this is a mistake in consequentialism, which has a crude idea of what an action is, though I am not convinced that this is the key fault in the theory. The theory doesn't distinguish acts by people from those by machines.
27. Natural Reality / G. Biology / 4. Ecology
6854 Does the environment have value in itself? [Crisp,R]
     Full Idea: The debate which dominates environmental ethics is whether the environment has value in itself.
     From: Roger Crisp (Interview with Baggini and Stangroom [2001], p.37)
     A reaction: I say the answer has to be 'yes'. If it only has value in relation to conscious or human life, it will be difficult to demonstrate that they have value. Pleasure and pain, or wisdom, can't imply value on their own; a bigger picture is needed.