Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Defending the Axioms', 'On Certainty' and 'Approaches to Intentionality'

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


16 ideas

4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 4. Axioms for Sets / j. Axiom of Choice IX
The Axiom of Choice paradoxically allows decomposing a sphere into two identical spheres [Maddy]
     Full Idea: One feature of the Axiom of Choice that troubled many mathematicians was the so-called Banach-Tarski paradox: using the Axiom, a sphere can be decomposed into finitely many parts and those parts reassembled into two spheres the same size as the original.
     From: Penelope Maddy (Defending the Axioms [2011], 1.3)
     A reaction: (The key is that the parts are non-measurable). To an outsider it is puzzling that the Axiom has been universally accepted, even though it produces such a result. Someone can explain that, I'm sure.
5. Theory of Logic / C. Ontology of Logic / 3. If-Thenism
Critics of if-thenism say that not all starting points, even consistent ones, are worth studying [Maddy]
     Full Idea: If-thenism denies that mathematics is in the business of discovering truths about abstracta. ...[their opponents] obviously don't regard any starting point, even a consistent one, as equally worthy of investigation.
     From: Penelope Maddy (Defending the Axioms [2011], 3.3)
     A reaction: I have some sympathy with if-thenism, in that you can obviously study the implications of any 'if' you like, but deep down I agree with the critics.
5. Theory of Logic / K. Features of Logics / 1. Axiomatisation
Hilbert's geometry and Dedekind's real numbers were role models for axiomatization [Maddy]
     Full Idea: At the end of the nineteenth century there was a renewed emphasis on rigor, the central tool of which was axiomatization, along the lines of Hilbert's axioms for geometry and Dedekind's axioms for real numbers.
     From: Penelope Maddy (Defending the Axioms [2011], 1.3)
If two mathematical themes coincide, that suggest a single deep truth [Maddy]
     Full Idea: The fact that two apparently fruitful mathematical themes turn out to coincide makes it all the more likely that they're tracking a genuine strain of mathematical depth.
     From: Penelope Maddy (Defending the Axioms [2011], 5.3ii)
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 5. The Infinite / g. Continuum Hypothesis
Every infinite set of reals is either countable or of the same size as the full set of reals [Maddy]
     Full Idea: One form of the Continuum Hypothesis is the claim that every infinite set of reals is either countable or of the same size as the full set of reals.
     From: Penelope Maddy (Defending the Axioms [2011], 2.4 n40)
6. Mathematics / B. Foundations for Mathematics / 6. Mathematics as Set Theory / a. Mathematics is set theory
Set-theory tracks the contours of mathematical depth and fruitfulness [Maddy]
     Full Idea: Our set-theoretic methods track the underlying contours of mathematical depth. ...What sets are, most fundamentally, is markers for these contours ...they are maximally effective trackers of certain trains of mathematical fruitfulness.
     From: Penelope Maddy (Defending the Axioms [2011], 3.4)
     A reaction: This seems to make it more like a map of mathematics than the actual essence of mathematics.
6. Mathematics / C. Sources of Mathematics / 4. Mathematical Empiricism / c. Against mathematical empiricism
The connection of arithmetic to perception has been idealised away in modern infinitary mathematics [Maddy]
     Full Idea: Ordinary perceptual cognition is most likely involved in our grasp of elementary arithmetic, but ...this connection to the physical world has long since been idealized away in the infinitary structures of contemporary pure mathematics.
     From: Penelope Maddy (Defending the Axioms [2011], 2.3)
     A reaction: Despite this, Maddy's quest is for a 'naturalistic' account of mathematics. She ends up defending 'objectivity' (and invoking Tyler Burge), rather than even modest realism. You can't 'idealise away' the counting of objects. I blame Cantor.
11. Knowledge Aims / A. Knowledge / 4. Belief / a. Beliefs
Belief is the most important propositional attitude [Lyons]
     Full Idea: Belief might be accorded the status of core or chief propositional attitude.
     From: William Lyons (Approaches to Intentionality [1995], p.126)
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 4. Foundationalism / a. Foundationalism
Foundations need not precede other beliefs [Wittgenstein]
     Full Idea: I do not explicitly learn the propositions that stand fast for me. I can discover them subsequently like the axis around which a body rotates.
     From: Ludwig Wittgenstein (On Certainty [1951], §152), quoted by Michael Williams - Problems of Knowledge Ch.14
     A reaction: A nice metaphor for the way in which axioms are derived. It is also close to Quine's metaphor of the 'net' of understanding, with the centre area 'standing fast'. Not neat and tidy, though.
13. Knowledge Criteria / D. Scepticism / 6. Scepticism Critique
Total doubt can't even get started [Wittgenstein, by Williams,M]
     Full Idea: Wittgenstein remarked that if you tried to doubt everything, you would not get as far as doubting anything.
     From: report of Ludwig Wittgenstein (On Certainty [1951]) by Michael Williams - Problems of Knowledge Ch.14
15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 4. Intentionality / b. Intentionality theories
Consciousness no longer seems essential to intentionality [Lyons]
     Full Idea: In contrast with Brentano and Husserl, consciousness or attention are no longer seen as essential to intentionality.
     From: William Lyons (Approaches to Intentionality [1995], Intro)
     A reaction: This strikes me as being correct, although there seem to be plenty of current philosophers who do not accept it (e.g. Searle). I think philosophy of mind may be stuck in the dark ages if thinkers don't accept this proposal.
17. Mind and Body / E. Mind as Physical / 4. Connectionism
Perceptions could give us information without symbolic representation [Lyons]
     Full Idea: It is possible to give an account of concept-formation without a language of thought or representation, based on perception, which in the brain seems to involve information without representation.
     From: William Lyons (Approaches to Intentionality [1995], p.66)
     A reaction: This claim strikes me as being a little too confident. One might say that a concept IS a representation. However, the perception of several horses might 'blur' together to form a generalised horse.
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 2. Propositional Attitudes
Propositional attitudes require representation [Lyons]
     Full Idea: How else, other than via some form of representational system, could a human organism contain information as a content over which it could operate or 'attitudinise'?
     From: William Lyons (Approaches to Intentionality [1995], Intro)
     A reaction: Depends what you mean by 'representational'. In its vaguest sense, this is just a tautology - content must be held in the mind in some form or other, but that tells us nothing.
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 4. Folk Psychology
Folk psychology works badly for alien cultures [Lyons]
     Full Idea: It is not easy to employ our folk psychology in the understanding of persons in a very different culture.
     From: William Lyons (Approaches to Intentionality [1995], p.241)
     A reaction: This strikes me as a highly significant problem for the friends of folk psychology. It also breaks down in extreme situations, or with mental illness. It seems closer to culture than to brain structure.
18. Thought / C. Content / 1. Content
All thinking has content [Lyons]
     Full Idea: I cannot say I am simply thinking but not thinking about anything.
     From: William Lyons (Approaches to Intentionality [1995], Intro)
     A reaction: Hard to disagree. However, I can plausibly reply to 'What are you thinking?' with 'Nothing', if my consciousness is freewheeling. Utterly disconnected content isn't really what we call 'thinking'.
19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 10. Denial of Meanings
If you are not certain of any fact, you cannot be certain of the meaning of your words either [Wittgenstein]
     Full Idea: If you are not certain of any fact, you cannot be certain of the meaning of your words either.
     From: Ludwig Wittgenstein (On Certainty [1951], §114)
     A reaction: A wonderfully challenging aphorism. I suspect that it is true, but not really a problem. We all know the meaning of 'Loch Ness Monster', as long as we don't get too fussy. And for local objects I am happy that I know the facts.