Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Life of Pythagoras', 'Pref to new 'Materialist Theory'' and 'Contextualism Defended'

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


12 ideas

12. Knowledge Sources / B. Perception / 2. Qualities in Perception / d. Secondary qualities
Secondary qualities are microscopic primary qualities of physical things [Armstrong]
     Full Idea: I argue for the direct identification of the secondary qualities with microscopic primary qualities of physical things.
     From: David M. Armstrong (Pref to new 'Materialist Theory' [1992], p.xxii)
     A reaction: This sounds a bit like the eliminativism which Armstrong rejects. This seems in danger of mixing questions about the nature of mental events with questions about the nature of externally perceived objects.
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 6. Contextual Justification / a. Contextualism
Contextualism says sceptical arguments are true, relative to their strict context [Cohen,S]
     Full Idea: Contextualism explains the appeal of sceptical arguments by allowing that the claims of the sceptic are true, relative to the very strict context in which they are made.
     From: Stewart Cohen (Contextualism Defended [2005], p.57)
     A reaction: This strikes me a right. I've always thought that global scepticism must be conceded if we are being very strict indeed about justification, but also that it is ridiculous to be that strict. So the epistemological question is 'How strict should we be?'
Knowledge is context-sensitive, because justification is [Cohen,S]
     Full Idea: The context-sensitivity of knowledge is inherited from one of its components, i.e. justification.
     From: Stewart Cohen (Contextualism Defended [2005], p.68)
     A reaction: I think this is exactly right - that there is nothing relative or contextual about what is actually true, or what someone believes, but knowleddge is wholly relative because it rests on shifting standards of justification.
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 6. Contextual Justification / b. Invariantism
There aren't invariant high standards for knowledge, because even those can be raised [Cohen,S]
     Full Idea: The problem for invariantism is that competent speakers, under sceptical pressure, tend to deny that we know even the most conspicuous facts of perception, the clearest memories etc.
     From: Stewart Cohen (Contextualism Defended [2005], p.58)
     A reaction: This is aimed at Idea 12892. This seems to me a strong response to the rather weak invariantist case (that there is 'really and truly' only one invariant standard for knowledge). Full strength scepticism about everything demolishes all knowledge.
15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 1. Consciousness / b. Essence of consciousness
Consciousness and experience of qualities are not the same [Armstrong]
     Full Idea: Consciousness and experience of qualities are often run together - a serious mistake, I think.
     From: David M. Armstrong (Pref to new 'Materialist Theory' [1992], p.xvii)
     A reaction: A difficult claim to evaluate. Can we experience redness without being conscious of it? Could there be consciousness (e.g. of concepts) which didn't involve any qualities? I suspect that qualities are more basic than intentionality or consciousness.
17. Mind and Body / B. Behaviourism / 1. Behaviourism
Behaviourism is false, but mind is definable as the cause of behaviour [Armstrong]
     Full Idea: Behaviourism is false, but one is not far from the truth if one defines the mind as the cause of behaviour.
     From: David M. Armstrong (Pref to new 'Materialist Theory' [1992], p.xvi)
     A reaction: As Putnam says, if you cut all the efferent (outgoing) nerves, you would have a mind with no behaviour at all. I would say my mind is full of stuff that never affects my behaviour. However, influencing behaviour is certainly the main function of a mind.
17. Mind and Body / B. Behaviourism / 2. Potential Behaviour
The manifestations of a disposition need never actually exist [Armstrong]
     Full Idea: The manifestations of a disposition have the particularly mysterious property (metaphysically speaking) that they need not exist - which makes them rather like intentional objects.
     From: David M. Armstrong (Pref to new 'Materialist Theory' [1992], p.xvii)
     A reaction: His example is a brittle glass which never shatters. This problem seems to require the mention of conditional and counterfactual statements in the description of the actual world, which rather increases the workload for philosophers.
17. Mind and Body / C. Functionalism / 4. Causal Functionalism
Causal Functionalism says mental states are apt for producing behaviour [Armstrong]
     Full Idea: I speak of my view as the Causal version of functionalism, which asserts that mental states are states apt for the production of certain ranges of behaviour and, in some cases, apt for being produced by certain ranges of stimuli.
     From: David M. Armstrong (Pref to new 'Materialist Theory' [1992], p.xiv)
     A reaction: This effectively makes a mental state a place in a flowdiagram (and hence the mind is software). It says nothing about what qualities the mental states have which make them apt for this role. Full explanations need more than the function.
17. Mind and Body / C. Functionalism / 5. Teleological Functionalism
A causal theory of mentality would be improved by a teleological element [Armstrong]
     Full Idea: I now think, following Lycan, that my Causal theory of mentality would be strengthened (perhaps eliminating some potential counter-examples) by the addition of a teleological element.
     From: David M. Armstrong (Pref to new 'Materialist Theory' [1992], p.xviii)
     A reaction: For Lycan, see Idea 6533. Armstrong has begun to realise that merely specifying the causal role of a mental state is too thin as an explanation. Teleology widens the notion of function. I also want to know about the properties that make it possible.
17. Mind and Body / E. Mind as Physical / 1. Physical Mind
The identity of mental states with physical properties is contingent, because the laws of nature are contingent [Armstrong]
     Full Idea: Granted the contingency of the laws of nature, the identification of dispositions with their categorical bases can be contingent only.
     From: David M. Armstrong (Pref to new 'Materialist Theory' [1992], p.xvi)
     A reaction: Personally I am not willing to grant the contingency of the laws of nature, but I suppose Armstrong is right about identity if he is right about laws. Presumably an identity could happen to be invariant across possible worlds, without being necessary.
17. Mind and Body / E. Mind as Physical / 7. Anti-Physicalism / b. Multiple realisability
One mental role might be filled by a variety of physical types [Armstrong]
     Full Idea: If the mental is just that which plays a causal role then there is the possibility, which may even be an empirical possibility, that the causal role of tokens of the same mental type should be filled by tokens of significantly different physical types.
     From: David M. Armstrong (Pref to new 'Materialist Theory' [1992], p.xiv)
     A reaction: This allows for multiple realisability in a physicalist framework. Fear has the same role in all animals, but may be realised in physically different ways. I go further, and say that two mental states could differ, while playing the same role.
28. God / A. Divine Nature / 6. Divine Morality / b. Euthyphro question
Pythagoreans believe it is absurd to seek for goodness anywhere except with the gods [Iamblichus]
     Full Idea: The thinking behind Pythagorean philosophy is that people behave in an absurd fashion if they try to find any source for the good other than the gods.
     From: Iamblichus (Life of Pythagoras [c.290], 137)