|
8216
|
Deconstruction is not neutral; it intervenes [Derrida]
|
|
Full Idea:
Deconstruction, I have insisted, is not neutral. It intervenes.
|
|
From:
Jacques Derrida (Positions [1971], p.76)
|
|
A reaction:
This, I think, is because there is in Derrida, as in most French philosophers, a strong streak of Marxism, and a desire to change the world, rather than merely understanding it. Idea 8213 shows the sort of thing he wants to change.
|
|
8213
|
I try to analyse certain verbal concepts which block and confuse the dialectical process [Derrida]
|
|
Full Idea:
I have tried to analyse certain marks in writing which are undecidables, false verbal properties, which inhabit philosophical opposition, resisting and disorganising it, without ever constituting a third term, withour ever leaving room for a solution.
|
|
From:
Jacques Derrida (Positions [1971], p.40)
|
|
A reaction:
[I have simplified his sentence!] Much of Derrida seems to be a commentary on the Hegelian dialectic, and the project is presumably to figure out why philosophy is not advancing in the way we would like. Interesting...
|
|
19046
|
Empiricism improvements: words for ideas, then sentences, then systems, then no analytic, then naturalism [Quine]
|
|
Full Idea:
Since 1750 empiricism shows five turns for the better. First was a shift from ideas to words. Second a shift from terms to sentences. Third the shift to systems of sentences. Fourth the abandonment of analytic-synthetic dualism. Fifth was naturalism.
|
|
From:
Willard Quine (Five Milestones of Empiricism [1975], p.67)
|
|
A reaction:
[compressed] Quine must be largely credited with the last two. The first four are almost entirely linguistic in character, which is characteristic of mid-twentieth-century empiricism. I would offer the recognition of explanation as central for the sixth.
|
|
8430
|
Causal statements are used to explain, to predict, to control, to attribute responsibility, and in theories [Kim]
|
|
Full Idea:
The function of causal statements is 1) to explain events, 2) for predictive usefulness, 3) to help control events, 4) with agents, to attribute moral responsibility, 5) in physical theory. We should judge causal theories by how they account for these.
|
|
From:
Jaegwon Kim (Causes and Counterfactuals [1973], p.207)
|
|
A reaction:
He suggests that Lewis's counterfactual theory won't do well on this test. I think the first one is what matters. Philosophy aims to understand, and that is achieved through explanation. Regularity and counterfactual theories explain very little.
|
|
8429
|
Counterfactuals can express four other relations between events, apart from causation [Kim]
|
|
Full Idea:
Counterfactuals can express 'analytical' dependency, or the fact that one event is part of another, or an action done by doing another, or (most interestingly) an event can determine another without causally determining it.
|
|
From:
Jaegwon Kim (Causes and Counterfactuals [1973], p.205)
|
|
A reaction:
[Kim gives example of each case] Counterfactuals can even express a relation that involves no dependency. Or they might just involve redescription, as in 'If Scott were still alive, then the author of "Waverley" would be too'.
|
|
4781
|
Many counterfactual truths do not imply causation ('if yesterday wasn't Monday, it isn't Tuesday') [Kim, by Psillos]
|
|
Full Idea:
Kim gives a range of examples of counterfactual dependence without causation, as: 'if yesterday wasn't Monday, today wouldn't be Tuesday', and 'if my sister had not given birth, I would not be an uncle'.
|
|
From:
report of Jaegwon Kim (Causes and Counterfactuals [1973]) by Stathis Psillos - Causation and Explanation §3.3
|
|
A reaction:
This is aimed at David Lewis. The objection seems like commonsense. "If you blink, the cat gets it". Causal claims involve counterfactuals, but they are not definitive of what causation is.
|