Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'On the Philosophy of Logic', 'De Corpore (Elements, First Section)' and 'Slaughterhouse Five'

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


51 ideas

1. Philosophy / D. Nature of Philosophy / 5. Aims of Philosophy / e. Philosophy as reason
Definitions are the first step in philosophy [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: In beginning philosophy, the first beginning is from definitions.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 1.6.15)
     A reaction: Note that he doesn't say that definitions are the aim of philosophy, as some analysts might think.
2. Reason / A. Nature of Reason / 1. On Reason
We reach 'reflective equilibrium' when intuitions and theory completely align [Fisher]
     Full Idea: A state of 'reflective equilibrium' is when our theory and our intuitions become completely aligned
     From: Jennifer Fisher (On the Philosophy of Logic [2008], 12.IV)
     A reaction: [Rawls made this concept famous] This is a helpful concept in trying to spell out the ideal which is the dream of believers in 'pure reason' - that there is a goal in which everything comes right. The problem is when people have different intuitions!
2. Reason / D. Definition / 2. Aims of Definition
Definitions of things that are caused must express their manner of generation [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Definitions of things which may be understood to have some cause, must consist of such names as express the cause or manner of their generation, as when we define a circle to be a figure made by the circumduction of a straight line in a plane etc.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 1.6.13)
     A reaction: His account of the circle is based on its mode of construction, which is the preferred account of Euclid, rather than a statement of its pure nature.
2. Reason / D. Definition / 5. Genus and Differentia
Definition is resolution of names into successive genera, and finally the difference [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: The definition is nothing but a resolution of the name into its most universal parts; ...definitions of this kind always consist of genus and difference; the former names being all, till the last, general; and the last of all, difference.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 1.6.14)
     A reaction: This is basically the scholastic Aristotelian view of definition. Note that Hobbes explicitly denies that the last step of the definition is general in character.
2. Reason / D. Definition / 8. Impredicative Definition
A defined name should not appear in the definition [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: A defined name ought not to be repeated in the definition. ...No total can be part of itself.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 1.6.15)
2. Reason / F. Fallacies / 3. Question Begging
'Petitio principii' is reusing the idea to be defined, in disguised words [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: 'Petitio principii' is when the conclusion to be proved is disguised in other words, and put for the definition or principle from whence it is to be demonstrated.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 1.6.18)
4. Formal Logic / E. Nonclassical Logics / 3. Many-Valued Logic
Three-valued logic says excluded middle and non-contradition are not tautologies [Fisher]
     Full Idea: In three-valued logic (L3), neither the law of excluded middle (p or not-p), nor the law of non-contradiction (not(p and not-p)) will be tautologies. If p has the value 'indeterminate' then so will not-p.
     From: Jennifer Fisher (On the Philosophy of Logic [2008], 07.I)
     A reaction: I quite accept that the world is full of indeterminate propositions, and that excluded middle and non-contradiction can sometimes be uncertain, but I am reluctant to accept that what is being offered here should be called 'logic'.
4. Formal Logic / E. Nonclassical Logics / 4. Fuzzy Logic
Fuzzy logic has many truth values, ranging in fractions from 0 to 1 [Fisher]
     Full Idea: In fuzzy logic objects have properties to a greater or lesser degree, and truth values are given as fractions or decimals, ranging from 0 to 1. Not-p is defined as 1-p, and other formula are defined in terms of maxima and minima for sets.
     From: Jennifer Fisher (On the Philosophy of Logic [2008], 07.II)
     A reaction: The question seems to be whether this is actually logic, or a recasting of probability theory. Susan Haack attacks it. If logic is the study of how truth is preserved as we move between propositions, then 0 and 1 need a special status.
4. Formal Logic / G. Formal Mereology / 3. Axioms of Mereology
A part of a part is a part of a whole [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: A part of a part is a part of a whole.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.07.09)
5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 6. Classical Logic
Classical logic is: excluded middle, non-contradiction, contradictions imply all, disjunctive syllogism [Fisher]
     Full Idea: For simplicity, we can say that 'classical logic' amounts to the truth of four sentences: 1) either p or not-p; 2) it is not the case that both p and not-p; 3) from p and not-p, infer q; 4) from p or q and not-p, infer q.
     From: Jennifer Fisher (On the Philosophy of Logic [2008], 12.I)
     A reaction: [She says there are many ways of specifying classical logic] Intuition suggests that 2 and 4 are rather hard to dispute, while 1 is ignoring some grey areas, and 3 is totally ridiculous. There is, of course, plenty of support for 3!
5. Theory of Logic / C. Ontology of Logic / 2. Platonism in Logic
Logic formalizes how we should reason, but it shouldn't determine whether we are realists [Fisher]
     Full Idea: Even if one is inclined to be a realist about everything, it is hard to see why our logic should be the determiner. Logic is supposed to formalize how we ought to reason, but whether or not we should be realists is a matter of philosophy, not logic.
     From: Jennifer Fisher (On the Philosophy of Logic [2008], 09.I)
     A reaction: Nice to hear a logician saying this. I do not see why talk in terms of an object is a commitment to its existence. We can discuss the philosopher's stone, or Arthur's sword, or the Loch Ness monster, or gravitinos, with degrees of commitment.
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 3. Nature of Numbers / e. Ordinal numbers
If we just say one, one, one, one, we don't know where we have got to [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: By saying one, one, one, one, and so forward, we know not what number we are at beyond two or three.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.12.05)
     A reaction: This makes ordinals sound like meta-numbers.
7. Existence / B. Change in Existence / 1. Nature of Change
Change is nothing but movement [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: All mutation consists in motion only
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.09.06)
     A reaction: Another little gem of simplicity from Hobbes, and one with which I am inclined to agree. The value of a variable can 'change', but that may be metaphorical.
7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 10. Vagueness / g. Degrees of vagueness
We could make our intuitions about heaps precise with a million-valued logic [Fisher]
     Full Idea: We could construct a 1,000,000-valued logic that would allow our intuitions concerning a heap to vary exactly with the amount of sand in the heap.
     From: Jennifer Fisher (On the Philosophy of Logic [2008])
     A reaction: Presumably only an infinite number of grains of sand would then produce a true heap, and even one grain would count as a bit of a heap, which must both be wrong, so I can't see this helping much.
8. Modes of Existence / B. Properties / 8. Properties as Modes
Accidents are just modes of thinking about bodies [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: An accident is a mode of conceiving a body.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.02)
     A reaction: In contrast to the other thinkers who followed Suárez on modes in the early 17th century, Hobbes thinks they are just ways of 'conceiving' bodies, rather than actual features of them.
8. Modes of Existence / B. Properties / 12. Denial of Properties
Accidents are not parts of bodies (like blood in a cloth); they have accidents as things have a size [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: An accident's being in a body is not to be taken as something contained in that body - as if redness were in blood like blood in a bloody cloth, as part of the whole, for then accident would be a body. It is like body having size or rest or movement.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.03)
     A reaction: [compressed] Hobbes is fishing for something like the Quinean view of properties, but no one seems to be able to articulate this sceptical view very well. Pasnau says he means to talk of 'the mode of conceiving a body' (De C 8.2).
8. Modes of Existence / C. Powers and Dispositions / 3. Powers as Derived
The complete power of an event is just the aggregate of the qualities that produced it [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: The power of agent and patient taken together, which may be called the complete power, is the same as the complete cause, for each consists in the aggregation together of all the accidents that are required to produce an effect in both agent and patient.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.10.01)
     A reaction: They treat powers as macro phenomena, and don't seem to have a sense of the basic powers that build up the big picture.
8. Modes of Existence / E. Nominalism / 1. Nominalism / b. Nominalism about universals
The only generalities or universals are names or signs [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Nothing is general or universal besides names or signs.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.05)
     A reaction: This is the perfect motto for nominalists, among which I am inclined to include myself. Hobbes had a fabulous gift for economy of phrasing. This website is dedicated to that ideal. Reality does not contain generalities (obviously!!).
9. Objects / A. Existence of Objects / 5. Individuation / c. Individuation by location
Bodies are independent of thought, and coincide with part of space [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: A body is that, which having no dependence on our thought, is coincident or coextended with some part of space.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.01)
     A reaction: This rather Cartesian view doesn't seem to offer any distinction between empty space and space containing an 'object'. Presumably it is the ancestor of the Quinean account just in terms of space-time points. Don't like it.
If you separate the two places of one thing, you will also separate the thing [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: One body cannot be in two places at the same time, ...for the place that a body fills being divided into two, the placed body will also be divided into two; the place and the body that fills that place are divided both together.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.08)
     A reaction: If every time you manipulated one body it affected both of them, you might say that one body was in two places, rather like a mirror image.
If you separated two things in the same place, you would also separate the places [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Two bodies cannot be together in the same place, ..because when a body that fills its whole place is divided into two, the place itself is divided into two also, so that there will be two places.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.08)
     A reaction: The wonderful things about philosophy is that you are faced with obvious truths of the world, and cannot begin to think why they are true - and then up steps a philosopher and offers you a reason.
9. Objects / B. Unity of Objects / 1. Unifying an Object / b. Unifying aggregates
If a whole body is moved, its parts must move with it [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: How can any whole body be moved, unless all its parts be moved together with it?
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.05)
     A reaction: This might be a distinguishing mark for a whole physical body. I think it is probably the main mark for ordinary folk. I've never found this idea in Aristotle.
9. Objects / B. Unity of Objects / 3. Unity Problems / e. Vague objects
Vagueness can involve components (like baldness), or not (like boredom) [Fisher]
     Full Idea: Vague terms come in at least two different kinds: those whose constituent parts come in discrete packets (bald, rich, red) and those that don't (beauty, boredom, niceness).
     From: Jennifer Fisher (On the Philosophy of Logic [2008], 07.II)
     A reaction: The first group seem to be features of the external world, and the second all occur in the mind. Baldness may be vague, but presumably hairs are (on the whole) not. Nature doesn't care whether someone is actually 'bald' or not.
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 8. Parts of Objects / b. Sums of parts
A body is always the same, whether the parts are together or dispersed [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: A body is always the same, whether the parts of it be put together or dispersed; or whether it be congealed or dissolved.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.11.07)
     A reaction: This appears to be a commitment by Hobbes to what we now call 'classical' mereology - that any bunch of things can count as a whole, whether they are together or dispersed. He seems to mean more than a watch surviving dismantling.
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 8. Parts of Objects / c. Wholes from parts
To make a whole, parts needn't be put together, but can be united in the mind [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: In composition, it is to be understood that for the making up of a whole there is no need of putting the parts together, so as to make them touch one another, but only of collecting them into one sum in the mind.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.07.08)
     A reaction: This seems to the 'unrestricted composition' of classical mereology, since it appears that Hobbes offers no restriction on which parts can be united by a mind, no matter how bizarre.
9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 5. Essence as Kind
Particulars contain universal things [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Universal things are contained in the nature of singular things.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 1.6.04)
     A reaction: That is the neatest and most accurate summary of the situation I have ever read. Particulars come first, but they are all riddled with generalities (but that is not as well said as Hobbes's remark).
9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 7. Essence and Necessity / b. Essence not necessities
Some accidental features are permanent, unless the object perishes [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: There are certain accidents which can never perish except the body perish also.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.03)
     A reaction: He is just making an observation, and not proposing a theory about essence.
9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 13. Nominal Essence
The feature which picks out or names a thing is usually called its 'essence' [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: That accident for which we give a certain name to any body, or the accident which denominates its subject, is commonly called the essence thereof.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.23)
     A reaction: This is clearly a prelude to Locke's more carefully formulated 'nominal essence'. Fairly obvious, for nominalist empiricists. A bit surprising to say this was 'common'.
9. Objects / E. Objects over Time / 8. Continuity of Rivers
It is the same river if it has the same source, no matter what flows in it [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: That will be the same river which flows from one and the same fountain, whether the same water, or other water, or something other than water, flow thence.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.11.07)
     A reaction: This makes the source the one necessity for a river. I think the end matters too. If the Thames reversed direction, and flowed into Wales, it would not be the Thames any more.
9. Objects / E. Objects over Time / 9. Ship of Theseus
Some individuate the ship by unity of matter, and others by unity of form [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: In the Ship of Theseus, some place individuity in the unity of matter; others, in the unity of form.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.11.07)
     A reaction: Simons raises this comment into a dogma, that there are at least two objects present in the ship. If I offered you a sum for the contents of your house, they would have a unity of monetary value.
If a new ship were made of the discarded planks, would two ships be numerically the same? [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: If some man kept the old planks as they were taken out, and by putting them afterwards together again in the same order, had again made a ship of them, ...there would have been two ships numerically the same, which is absurd.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.11.07)
     A reaction: This is the origin of the famous modern problematical example of the Ship of Theseus. The ancient example is just the case of whether you step into the same river, but using an artefact with parts, to make it clearer.
9. Objects / F. Identity among Objects / 3. Relative Identity
As an infant, Socrates was not the same body, but he was the same human being [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: It makes a great difference to ask concerning Socrates whether he is the same human being or whether he is the same body. For his body, when he is old, cannot be the same it was when he was an infant. …He can, however, be the same human being.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.11.07)
     A reaction: This is not commitment to full (Geachian) relative identity, but it notes the problem.
9. Objects / F. Identity among Objects / 8. Leibniz's Law
Two bodies differ when (at some time) you can say something of one you can't say of the other [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Two bodies are said to differ from one another, when something may be said of one of them, which cannot be said of the other at the same time.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.11.02)
     A reaction: Note the astute addition of 'at the same time'. Note also that it is couched in terms of what is true, rather than in terms of 'properties' or 'accidents'.
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 1. Possibility
We can't explain 'possibility' in terms of 'possible' worlds [Fisher]
     Full Idea: Explaining 'it is possible that p' by saying p is true in at least one possible world doesn't get me very far. If I don't understand what possibility is, then appealing to possible worlds is not going to do me much good.
     From: Jennifer Fisher (On the Philosophy of Logic [2008], 06.III)
     A reaction: This seems so blatant that I assume friends of possible worlds will have addressed the problem. Note that you will also need to understand 'possible' to define necessity as 'true in all possible worlds'. Necessarily-p is not-possibly-not-p.
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 8. Conditionals / c. Truth-function conditionals
If all truths are implied by a falsehood, then not-p might imply both q and not-q [Fisher]
     Full Idea: If all truths are implied by a falsehood, then 'if there are no trees in the park then there is no shade' and 'if there are no trees in the park there is plenty of shade' both come out as true. Intuitively, though, the second one is false.
     From: Jennifer Fisher (On the Philosophy of Logic [2008], 08.I)
     A reaction: The rule that a falsehood implies all truths must be the weakest idea in classical logic, if it actually implies a contradiction. This means we must take an interest in relevance logics.
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 8. Conditionals / d. Non-truthfunction conditionals
In relevance logic, conditionals help information to flow from antecedent to consequent [Fisher]
     Full Idea: A good account of relevance logic suggests that a conditional will be true when the flow of information is such that a conditional is the device that helps information to flow from the antecedent to the consequent.
     From: Jennifer Fisher (On the Philosophy of Logic [2008], 08.III)
     A reaction: Hm. 'If you are going out, you'll need an umbrella'. This passes on information about 'out', but also brings in new information. 'If you are going out, I'm leaving you'. What flows is an interpretation of the antecedent. Tricky.
10. Modality / D. Knowledge of Modality / 4. Conceivable as Possible / b. Conceivable but impossible
We can imagine a point swelling and contracting - but not how this could be done [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Even if we can feign in our mind that a point swells to a huge bulk and then contracts to a point - imagining something's made from nothing (ex nihilo), and nothing's made from something - still we cannot comprehend how this could be done in nature.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.20)
     A reaction: [compressed] Pasnau notes that this offers two sorts of conceivability, of something happening, and of a reason for it happening. A really nice idea, significant (I think) for scientific essentialists, who say possibilities are fewer than you think.
14. Science / D. Explanation / 2. Types of Explanation / g. Causal explanations
Science aims to show causes and generation of things [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: The end of science is the demonstration of the causes and generation of things.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 1.6.13)
15. Nature of Minds / C. Capacities of Minds / 2. Imagination
Imagination is just weakened sensation [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Imagination is nothing else but sense decaying or weakened by the absence of the object.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 4.25.07)
     A reaction: This sounds more like memory than imagination. He needs to say something about unusual combinations of memories, I would have thought.
15. Nature of Minds / C. Capacities of Minds / 10. Conatus/Striving
A 'conatus' is an initial motion, experienced by us as desire or aversion [Hobbes, by Arthur,R]
     Full Idea: Hobbes' notion of 'conatus' is a 'beginning of motion' - a motion through a point of space in an instant of time. In a human subject this is experience as desire or aversion. It thus forms a bridge between physics and psychology.
     From: report of Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], p.178) by Richard T.W. Arthur - Leibniz 3 'Worlds'
     A reaction: This sounds rather like the primitive concept of a power which I like, but the term seems to be used very vaguely, and never discussed carefully. The idea provoked Leibniz to connect physical force with mental life.
16. Persons / F. Free Will / 5. Against Free Will
Out of more than a hundred planets, Earth is the only one with the idea of free will [Vonnegut]
     Full Idea: I wouldn’t have any idea what was meant by ‘free will'. I’ve visited thirty-one inhabited planets in the universe, and studied reports on one hundred more. Only on Earth is there any talk of free will.
     From: Kurt Vonnegut (Slaughterhouse Five [1969], Ch.4)
     A reaction: Spoken by the ambassador from the planet Tralfamadore. Possibly the greatest put down of a philosophical idea since Diogenes responded to Plato's definition of a man. I think free will is a non-idea. It is non-sensical, and doesn't exist.
17. Mind and Body / E. Mind as Physical / 1. Physical Mind
Sensation is merely internal motion of the sentient being [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Sense in the sentient, can be nothing else but motion in some of the internal parts of the sentient; and the parts so moved are parts of the organs of sense.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 3.15.02)
     A reaction: Amazingly bold for the time, and presumably influenced by Lucretius. I am sympathetic, but to suggest that sensation is nothing more sounds a bit like a category mistake. Has he grasped that the brain is involved?
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 3. Emotions / e. Basic emotions
Apart from pleasure and pain, the only emotions are appetite and aversion [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: All the passions, called passions of the mind, consist of appetite and aversion, except pure pleasure and pain.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 4.25.13)
     A reaction: He now faces the challenge of explaining all the many other emotions in terms of these two. Good luck with that, Thomas.
18. Thought / B. Mechanics of Thought / 5. Mental Files
Words are not for communication, but as marks for remembering what we have learned [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: The use of words consists in this, that they may serve for marks by which whatsoever we have found out may be recalled to memory ...but not as signs by which we declare the same to others.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 1.6.11)
     A reaction: This exactly fits the idea of mental files, of which I am a fan. That this is the actual purpose of language is an unusual but interesting view.
26. Natural Theory / A. Speculations on Nature / 6. Early Matter Theories / b. Prime matter
Prime matter is body considered with mere size and extension, and potential [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Prime matter signifies body considered without the consideration of any form or accident except only magnitude or extension, and aptness to receive form and accidents.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.08.24)
     A reaction: I take 'considered without' to indicate that he thinks of it as a psychological abstraction, rather than some actual existing thing.
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 1. Causation
Acting on a body is either creating or destroying a property in it [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: A body is said to work upon or act, that is to say, do something to another body, when it either generates or destroys some accident in it.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.09.01)
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 8. Particular Causation / c. Conditions of causation
An effect needs a sufficient and necessary cause [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: There can be no effect but from a sufficient and necessary cause.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.10.02)
     A reaction: To be compared with Mackie's subtler modern account of this matter. If two different separate causes could lead to the same result, it is hard to see how the cause must be 'necessary' (unless you say they lead to different effects).
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 9. General Causation / d. Causal necessity
A cause is the complete sum of the features which necessitate the effect [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: A cause it the sum or aggregate of all such accidents, both in the agents and in the patient, as concur to the producing of the effect propounded; all of which existing together, ti cannot be understood but that the effect existenth without them.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 1.6.10)
     A reaction: For most causes we meet, this definition will include gravity and electro-magnetism, so it doesn't help in narrowing things down. Notice that he accepts the necessity, despite his committed empiricism.
27. Natural Reality / A. Classical Physics / 1. Mechanics / a. Explaining movement
Motion is losing one place and acquiring another [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Motion is privation of one place, and the acquisition of another.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 1.6.06)
     A reaction: This is basically the 'at-at' theory of motion which empiricists like, because it breaks motion down into atoms of experience. Hobbes needs an ontology which includes 'places'.
27. Natural Reality / A. Classical Physics / 1. Mechanics / c. Forces
'Force' is the quantity of movement imposed on something [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: I define 'force' to be the impetus or quickness of motion multiplied either into itself, or into the magnitude of the movent, by means of which whereof the said movent works more or less upon the body that resists it.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 3.15.02)
     A reaction: Not very helpful, perhaps, but it shows a view of force at quite an early date, well before Newton.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 2. Passage of Time / k. Temporal truths
Past times can't exist anywhere, apart from in our memories [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: When people speak of the times of their predecessors, they do not think after their predecessors are gone that their times can be any where else than in the memory of those that remember.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (De Corpore (Elements, First Section) [1655], 2.07.03)