Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Realistic Rationalism', 'Letters to Foucher' and 'Abstract Objects: a Case Study'

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


15 ideas

1. Philosophy / D. Nature of Philosophy / 3. Philosophy Defined
Traditionally philosophy is an a priori enquiry into general truths about reality [Katz]
     Full Idea: The traditional conception of philosophy is that it is an a priori enquiry into the most general facts about reality.
     From: Jerrold J. Katz (Realistic Rationalism [2000], Int.xi)
     A reaction: I think this still defines philosophy, though it also highlights the weakness of the subject, which is over-confidence about asserting necessary truths. How could the most god-like areas of human thought be about anything else?
Most of philosophy begins where science leaves off [Katz]
     Full Idea: Philosophy, or at least one large part of it, is subsequent to science; it begins where science leaves off.
     From: Jerrold J. Katz (Realistic Rationalism [2000], Int.xxi)
     A reaction: In some sense this has to be true. Without metaphysics there couldn't be any science. Rationalists should not forget, though, the huge impact which Darwin's science has (or should have) on fairly abstract philosophy (e.g. epistemology).
6. Mathematics / C. Sources of Mathematics / 1. Mathematical Platonism / b. Against mathematical platonism
'Real' maths objects have no causal role, no determinate reference, and no abstract/concrete distinction [Katz]
     Full Idea: Three objections to realism in philosophy of mathematics: mathematical objects have no space/time location, and so no causal role; that such objects are determinate, but reference to numbers aren't; and that there is no abstract/concrete distinction.
     From: Jerrold J. Katz (Realistic Rationalism [2000], Int.xxix)
6. Mathematics / C. Sources of Mathematics / 6. Logicism / c. Neo-logicism
Mathematics is both necessary and a priori because it really consists of logical truths [Yablo]
     Full Idea: Mathematics seems necessary because the real contents of mathematical statements are logical truths, which are necessary, and it seems a priori because logical truths really are a priori.
     From: Stephen Yablo (Abstract Objects: a Case Study [2002], 10)
     A reaction: Yablo says his logicism has a Kantian strain, because numbers and sets 'inscribed on our spectacles', but he takes a different view (in the present Idea) from Kant about where the necessity resides. Personally I am tempted by an a posteriori necessity.
6. Mathematics / C. Sources of Mathematics / 9. Fictional Mathematics
Putting numbers in quantifiable position (rather than many quantifiers) makes expression easier [Yablo]
     Full Idea: Saying 'the number of Fs is 5', instead of using five quantifiers, puts the numeral in quantifiable position, which brings expressive advantages. 'There are more sheep in the field than cows' is an infinite disjunction, expressible in finite compass.
     From: Stephen Yablo (Abstract Objects: a Case Study [2002], 08)
     A reaction: See Hofweber with similar thoughts. This idea I take to be a key one in explaining many metaphysical confusions. The human mind just has a strong tendency to objectify properties, relations, qualities, categories etc. - for expression and for reasoning.
7. Existence / C. Structure of Existence / 7. Abstract/Concrete / a. Abstract/concrete
Concrete objects have few essential properties, but properties of abstractions are mostly essential [Yablo]
     Full Idea: Objects like me have a few essential properties, and numerous accidental ones. Abstract objects are a different story. The intrinsic properties of the empty set are mostly essential. The relations of numbers are also mostly essential.
     From: Stephen Yablo (Abstract Objects: a Case Study [2002], 01)
We are thought to know concreta a posteriori, and many abstracta a priori [Yablo]
     Full Idea: Our knowledge of concreta is a posteriori, but our knowledge of numbers, at least, has often been considered a priori.
     From: Stephen Yablo (Abstract Objects: a Case Study [2002], 02)
8. Modes of Existence / C. Powers and Dispositions / 4. Powers as Essence
Essence is primitive force, or a law of change [Leibniz]
     Full Idea: The essence of substances consists in the primitive force of action, or the law of the sequence of changes.
     From: Gottfried Leibniz (Letters to Foucher [1675], 1676)
     A reaction: [a 1676 note on Foucher's reply] It take these to be the two key distinctive Leibnizian contributions to the sort of metaphysic that is needed by modern science. Nature works with intrinsic essences, which are forces determining action.
12. Knowledge Sources / A. A Priori Knowledge / 5. A Priori Synthetic
We don't have a clear enough sense of meaning to pronounce some sentences meaningless or just analytic [Katz]
     Full Idea: Linguistic meaning is not rich enough to show either that all metaphysical sentences are meaningless or that all alleged synthetic a priori propositions are just analytic a priori propositions.
     From: Jerrold J. Katz (Realistic Rationalism [2000], Int.xx)
12. Knowledge Sources / D. Empiricism / 5. Empiricism Critique
Experience cannot teach us why maths and logic are necessary [Katz]
     Full Idea: The Leibniz-Kant criticism of empiricism is that experience cannot teach us why mathematical and logical facts couldn't be otherwise than they are.
     From: Jerrold J. Katz (Realistic Rationalism [2000], Int.xxxi)
19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 1. Meaning
Structuralists see meaning behaviouristically, and Chomsky says nothing about it [Katz]
     Full Idea: In linguistics there are two schools of thought: Bloomfieldian structuralism (favoured by Quine) conceives of sentences acoustically and meanings behaviouristically; and Chomskian generative grammar (which is silent about semantics).
     From: Jerrold J. Katz (Realistic Rationalism [2000], Int.xxiv)
     A reaction: They both appear to be wrong, so there is (or was) something rotten in the state of linguistics. Are the only options for meaning either behaviourist or eliminativist?
19. Language / B. Reference / 4. Descriptive Reference / a. Sense and reference
It is generally accepted that sense is defined as the determiner of reference [Katz]
     Full Idea: There is virtually universal acceptance of Frege's definition of sense as the determiner of reference.
     From: Jerrold J. Katz (Realistic Rationalism [2000], Int.xxvi)
     A reaction: Not any more, since Kripke and Putnam. It is one thing to say sense determines reference, and quite another to say that this is the definition of sense.
19. Language / C. Assigning Meanings / 5. Fregean Semantics
Sense determines meaning and synonymy, not referential properties like denotation and truth [Katz]
     Full Idea: Pace Frege, sense determines sense properties and relations, like meaningfulness and synonymy, rather than determining referential properties, like denotation and truth.
     From: Jerrold J. Katz (Realistic Rationalism [2000], Int.xxvi)
     A reaction: This leaves room for Fregean 'sense', after Kripke has demolished the idea that sense determines reference.
19. Language / D. Propositions / 2. Abstract Propositions / a. Propositions as sense
Sentences are abstract types (like musical scores), not individual tokens [Katz]
     Full Idea: Sentences are types, not utterance tokens or mental/neural tokens, and hence sentences are abstract objects (like musical scores).
     From: Jerrold J. Katz (Realistic Rationalism [2000], Int.xxvi)
     A reaction: If sentences are abstract types, then two verbally indistinguishable sentences are the same sentence. But if I say 'I am happy', that isn't the same as you saying it.
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 9. General Causation / d. Causal necessity
The connection in events enables us to successfully predict the future, so there must be a constant cause [Leibniz]
     Full Idea: There is a connection among our appearances that provides us the means to predict future appearances with success, and this connection must have a constant cause.
     From: Gottfried Leibniz (Letters to Foucher [1675])