Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'The Varieties of Necessity', 'Dynamic Logics' and 'Representation in Music'

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


7 ideas

4. Formal Logic / E. Nonclassical Logics / 11. Dynamic Logics
Dyamic logics model changes between classical states, in action, belief, and computing [Uckelman]
     Full Idea: Dynamic logic gives versions of propositional, modal and predicate logics, in which the states are classical, but changes of assignments between states can be expressed, by modelling action, knowledge and belief change, and compute programs.
     From: Sara L. Uckelman (Dynamic Logics [2010])
     A reaction: [compressed]
10. Modality / C. Sources of Modality / 1. Sources of Necessity
Each area of enquiry, and its source, has its own distinctive type of necessity [Fine,K]
     Full Idea: The three sources of necessity - the identity of things, the natural order, and the normative order - have their own peculiar forms of necessity. The three main areas of human enquiry - metaphysics, science and ethics - each has its own necessity.
     From: Kit Fine (The Varieties of Necessity [2002], 6)
     A reaction: I would treat necessity in ethics with caution, if it is not reducible to natural or metaphysical necessity. Fine's proposal is interesting, but I did not find it convincing, especially in its view that metaphysical necessity doesn't intrude into nature.
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 7. Testimony
Unsupported testimony may still be believable [Fine,K]
     Full Idea: I may have good reason to believe some testimony, for example, even though the person providing the testimony has no good reason for saying what he does.
     From: Kit Fine (The Varieties of Necessity [2002], 5)
     A reaction: Thus small children, madmen and dreamers may occasionally get things right without realising it. I take testimony to be merely one more batch of evidence which has to be assessed in building the most coherent picture possible.
21. Aesthetics / B. Nature of Art / 4. Art as Expression
Reference without predication is the characteristic of expression [Scruton]
     Full Idea: Characteristic of expression is the presence of 'reference' without predication.
     From: Roger Scruton (Representation in Music [1976], p.71)
     A reaction: This echoes (in linguistic terms) Kant's thought that art is 'purposive without purpose'. The remark is comfortable in an essay on music, but it gets more tricky when the topic is literature, or even representational painting.
21. Aesthetics / B. Nature of Art / 5. Art as Language
If music refers to love, it contains no predication, so it is expression, not language [Scruton]
     Full Idea: If a passage carries a reference to love, we are not told what it says about love. And to speak of language with 'reference' but no predication is simply to misuse the word. We leave the realm of representation and enter that of expression.
     From: Roger Scruton (Representation in Music [1976], p.63-4)
     A reaction: This is a beautifully simple objection to the idea (associated with Nelson Goodman) that art is a language. Though what an 'expression' of something amounts to I am not quite sure.
21. Aesthetics / B. Nature of Art / 8. The Arts / a. Music
Music is not representational, since thoughts about a subject are never essential to it [Scruton]
     Full Idea: Music is not representational, since thoughts about a subject are never essential to the understanding of music.
     From: Roger Scruton (Representation in Music [1976], p.74)
     A reaction: I would not have thought that many people thought music was representational, but Scruton particularly mentions passages in opera that seem to pick up aspects of the story. Do even bell sounds not represent bells?
26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 8. Scientific Essentialism / a. Scientific essentialism
Causation is easier to disrupt than logic, so metaphysics is part of nature, not vice versa [Fine,K]
     Full Idea: It would be harder to break P-and-Q implying P than the connection between cause and effect. This difference in strictness means it is more plausible that natural necessities include metaphysical necessities, than vice versa.
     From: Kit Fine (The Varieties of Necessity [2002], 6)
     A reaction: I cannot see any a priori grounds for the claim that causation is more easily disrupted than logic. It seems to be based on the strategy of inferring possibilities from what can be imagined, which seems to me to lead to wild misunderstandings.