Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Mahaprajnaparamitashastra', 'Conditionals' and 'Animal Rights talk'

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


3 ideas

10. Modality / B. Possibility / 8. Conditionals / c. Truth-function conditionals
There are some assertable conditionals one would reject if one learned the antecedent [Jackson, by Edgington]
     Full Idea: Jackson came to realise that there are assertable conditionals which one would not continue to believe if one learned the antecedent, such as Lewis's "If Reagan worked for the KGB, I'll never find out".
     From: report of Frank Jackson (Conditionals [1987]) by Dorothy Edgington - Conditionals (Stanf) 4.2
     A reaction: That pesky David Lewis made trouble for everybody. Edgington agrees that his earlier formulation (Idea 14288) holds good for nearly all cases. There is a self-referential element in Lewis's example.
23. Ethics / C. Virtue Theory / 3. Virtues / a. Virtues
The six perfections are giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, and wisdom [Nagarjuna]
     Full Idea: The six perfections are of giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, and wisdom.
     From: Nagarjuna (Mahaprajnaparamitashastra [c.120], 88)
     A reaction: What is 'morality', if giving is not part of it? I like patience and vigour being two of the virtues, which immediately implies an Aristotelian mean (which is always what is 'appropriate').
25. Social Practice / C. Rights / 1. Basis of Rights
Rights are moral significance, or liberty, or right not to be restrained, or entitlement [Mawson]
     Full Idea: A 'right' can mean 'x counts morally', or 'x is permitted to do this' (liberty), or 'x can't be stopped from doing this' (negative right), or 'someone should provide this for x'.
     From: Tim Mawson (Animal Rights talk [2003]), quoted by PG - lecture notes
     A reaction: A useful analysis. It is a useful preliminary to considering whether any of these are natural rights. Personally I am sympathetic to that concept. You cannot deny a person's right to self-defence, even when you are sitting on them. Persons have rights.