|
22353
|
One view says objectivity is making a successful claim which captures the facts [Reiss/Sprenger]
|
|
Full Idea:
One conception of objectivity is that the facts are 'out there', and it is the task of scientists to discover, analyze and sytematize them. 'Objective' is a success word: if a claim is objective, it successfully captures some feature of the world.
|
|
From:
Reiss,J/Spreger,J (Scientific Objectivity [2014], 2)
|
|
A reaction:
This seems to describe truth, rather than objectivity. You can establish accurate facts by subjective means. You can be fairly objective but miss the facts. Objectivity is a mode of thought, not a link to reality.
|
|
22356
|
An absolute scientific picture of reality must not involve sense experience, which is perspectival [Reiss/Sprenger]
|
|
Full Idea:
Sense experience is necessarily perspectival, so to the extent to which scientific theories are to track the absolute conception [of reality], they must describe a world different from sense experience.
|
|
From:
Reiss,J/Spreger,J (Scientific Objectivity [2014], 2.3)
|
|
A reaction:
This is a beautifully simple and interesting point. Even when you are looking at a tree, to grasp its full reality you probably need to close your eyes (which is bad news for artists).
|
|
22359
|
Topic and application involve values, but can evidence and theory choice avoid them? [Reiss/Sprenger]
|
|
Full Idea:
There may be values involved in the choice of a research problem, the gathering of evidence, the acceptance of a theory, and the application of results. ...The first and fourth do involve values, but what of the second and third?
|
|
From:
Reiss,J/Spreger,J (Scientific Objectivity [2014], 3.1)
|
|
A reaction:
[compressed] My own view is that the danger of hidden distorting values has to be recognised, but it is then possible, by honest self-criticism, to reduce them to near zero. Sociological enquiry is different, of course.
|
|
22360
|
The Value-Free Ideal in science avoids contextual values, but embraces epistemic values [Reiss/Sprenger]
|
|
Full Idea:
According to the Value-Free Ideal, scientific objectivity is characterised by absence of contextual values and by exclusive commitment to epistemic values in scientific reasoning.
|
|
From:
Reiss,J/Spreger,J (Scientific Objectivity [2014], 3.1)
|
|
A reaction:
This seems appealing, because it concedes that we cannot be value-free, without suggesting that we are unavoidably swamped by values. The obvious question is whether the two types of value can be sharply distinguished.
|
|
22362
|
Value-free science needs impartial evaluation, theories asserting facts, and right motivation [Reiss/Sprenger]
|
|
Full Idea:
Three components of value-free science are Impartiality (appraising theories only by epistemic scientific standards), Neutrality (the theories make no value statements), and Autonomy (the theory is motivated only by science).
|
|
From:
Reiss,J/Spreger,J (Scientific Objectivity [2014], 3.3)
|
|
A reaction:
[They are summarising Hugh Lacey, 1999, 2002] I'm not sure why the third criterion matters, if the first two are met. If a tobacco company commissions research on cigarettes, that doesn't necessarily make the findings false or prejudiced.
|
|
22364
|
Thermometers depend on the substance used, and none of them are perfect [Reiss/Sprenger]
|
|
Full Idea:
Thermometers assume the length of the fluid or gas is a function of temperature, and different substances yield different results. It was decided that different thermometers using the same substance should match, and air was the best, but not perfect.
|
|
From:
Reiss,J/Spreger,J (Scientific Objectivity [2014], 4.1)
|
|
A reaction:
[summarising Hasok Chang's research] This is a salutary warning that instruments do not necessarily solve the problem of objectivity, though thermometers do seem to be impersonal, and offer relative accuracy (i.e. ranking temperatures). Cf breathalysers.
|
|
12017
|
In all instances of identity, there must be some facts to ensure the identity [Forbes,G]
|
|
Full Idea:
For each instance of identity or failure of identity, there must be facts in virtue of which that instance obtains. ..Enough has been said to lend this doctrine some plausibility.
|
|
From:
Graeme Forbes (The Metaphysics of Modality [1985], 5.5)
|
|
A reaction:
Penelope Mackie picks this out from Forbes as a key principle. It sounds to be in danger of circularity, unless the 'facts' can be cited without referring to, or implicitly making use of, identities - which seems unlikely.
|
|
12024
|
If we combined two clocks, it seems that two clocks may have become one clock. [Forbes,G]
|
|
Full Idea:
If we imagine a possible world in which two clocks in a room make one clock from half the parts of each, the judgement 'these two actual clocks could have been a single clock' does not seem wholly false.
|
|
From:
Graeme Forbes (The Metaphysics of Modality [1985], 7.4)
|
|
A reaction:
You would, of course, have sufficient parts left over to make a second clock, so they look like a destroyed clock, so I don't think I find Forbes's intuition on this one very persuasive.
|
|
11885
|
Only individual essences will ground identities across worlds in other properties [Forbes,G, by Mackie,P]
|
|
Full Idea:
Forbes argues that, unless we posit individual essences, we cannot guarantee that identities across possible worlds will be appropriately grounded in other properties.
|
|
From:
report of Graeme Forbes (The Metaphysics of Modality [1985]) by Penelope Mackie - How Things Might Have Been 2.4
|
|
A reaction:
There is a confrontation between Wiggins, who says identity is primitive, and Forbes, who says identity must be grounded in other properties. I think I side with Forbes.
|
|
12015
|
Non-trivial individual essence is properties other than de dicto, or universal, or relational [Forbes,G]
|
|
Full Idea:
A non-trivial individual essence is properties other than a) those following from a de dicto truth, b) properties of existence and self-identity (or their cognates), c) properties derived from necessities in some other category.
|
|
From:
Graeme Forbes (The Metaphysics of Modality [1985], 5.1)
|
|
A reaction:
[I have compressed Forbes] Rather than adding all these qualificational clauses to our concept, we could just tighten up on the notion of a property, saying it is something which is causally efficacious, and hence explanatory.
|
|
12013
|
Essential properties depend on a category, and perhaps also on particular facts [Forbes,G]
|
|
Full Idea:
The essential properties of a thing will typically depend upon what category of thing it is, and perhaps also on some more particular facts about the thing itself.
|
|
From:
Graeme Forbes (The Metaphysics of Modality [1985], 5.1)
|
|
A reaction:
I see no way of dispensing with the second requirement, in the cases of complex entities like animals. If all samples are the same, then of course we can define a sample's essence through its kind, but not if samples differ in any way.
|
|
12020
|
An individual might change their sex in a world, but couldn't have differed in sex at origin [Forbes,G]
|
|
Full Idea:
In the time of a single world, the same individual can undergo a change of sex, but it is less clear that an individual of one sex could have been, from the outset, an individual of another.
|
|
From:
Graeme Forbes (The Metaphysics of Modality [1985], 6.5)
|
|
A reaction:
I don't find this support for essentiality of origin very persuasive. I struggle with these ideas. Given my sex yesterday, then presumably I couldn't have had a different sex yesterday. Given that pigs can fly, pigs can fly. What am I missing?
|
|
11888
|
Identities must hold because of other facts, which must be instrinsic [Forbes,G, by Mackie,P]
|
|
Full Idea:
Forbes has two principles of identity, which we can call the No Bare Identities Principle (identities hold in virtue of other facts), and the No Extrinsic Determination Principle (that only intrinsic facts of a thing establish identity).
|
|
From:
report of Graeme Forbes (The Metaphysics of Modality [1985], 127-8) by Penelope Mackie - How Things Might Have Been 2.7
|
|
A reaction:
The job of the philosopher is to prise apart the real identities of things from the way in which we conceive of identities. I take these principles to apply to real identities, not conceptual identities.
|
|
12008
|
Unlike places and times, we cannot separate possible worlds from what is true at them [Forbes,G]
|
|
Full Idea:
There is no means by which we might distinguish a possible world from what is true at it. ...Whereas our ability to separate a place, or a time, from its occupier is crucial to realism about places and times, as is a distance relation.
|
|
From:
Graeme Forbes (The Metaphysics of Modality [1985], 4.2)
|
|
A reaction:
He is objecting to Lewis's modal realism. I'm not fully convinced. It depends whether we are discussing real ontology or conceptual space. In the latter I see no difference between times and possible worlds. In ontology, a 'time' is weird.
|
|
12016
|
The problem of transworld identity can be solved by individual essences [Forbes,G]
|
|
Full Idea:
The motivation for investigating individual essences should be obvious, since if every object has such an essence, the problem of elucidating transworld identity can be solved.
|
|
From:
Graeme Forbes (The Metaphysics of Modality [1985], 5.1)
|
|
A reaction:
It is important that, if necessary, the identities be 'individual', and not just generic, by sortal, or natural kind. We want to reason about (and explain) truths at the fine-grained level of the individual, not just at the broad level of generalisation.
|
|
12029
|
We believe in thisnesses, because we reject bizarre possibilities as not being about that individual [Forbes,G]
|
|
Full Idea:
The natural response to an unreasonable hypothesis of possibility for an object x, that in such a state of affairs it would not be x which satisfies the conditions, is evidence that we do possess concepts of thisness for individuals.
|
|
From:
Graeme Forbes (The Metaphysics of Modality [1985], 9.4)
|
|
A reaction:
We may have a 'concept' of thisness, but we needn't be committed to the 'existence' of a thisness. There is a fairly universal intuition that cessation of existence of an entity when it starts to change can be a very vague matter.
|
|
22357
|
The 'experimenter's regress' says success needs reliability, which is only tested by success [Reiss/Sprenger]
|
|
Full Idea:
The 'experimenter's regress' says that to know whether a result is correct, one needs to know whether the apparatus is reliable. But one doesn't know whether the apparatus is reliable unless one knows that it produces correct results ...and so on.
|
|
From:
Reiss,J/Spreger,J (Scientific Objectivity [2014], 2.3)
|
|
A reaction:
[H. Collins (1985), a sociologist] I take this to be a case of the triumphant discovery of a vicious circle which destroys all knowledge turning out to be a benign circle. We build up a coherent relationship between reliable results and good apparatus.
|
|
3654
|
The pineal gland links soul to body, and unites the two symmetrical sides of the body [Descartes, by PG]
|
|
Full Idea:
The soul is united with the body in just one place, a gland (the pineal) in the centre of the brain. It is placed so that its slightest movement will affect the passions, and it plays the essential role of uniting the two symmetrical sides of the body.
|
|
From:
report of René Descartes (The Passions of the Soul [1649], §31) by PG - Db (ideas)
|
|
A reaction:
See Idea 4862 for Spinoza's nice response to Descartes' proposal. If Descartes had followed brain research for the last four hundred years, at what point would he have wavered? If every single part of the brain seems to 'interact', dualism looks unlikely.
|
|
4313
|
Are there a few primary passions (say, joy, sadness and desire)? [Descartes, by Cottingham]
|
|
Full Idea:
Descartes says there are six primary passions (wonder, love, hatred, desire, joy and sadness); Spinoza says there are just three (joy, sadness and desire).
|
|
From:
report of René Descartes (The Passions of the Soul [1649]) by John Cottingham - The Rationalists p.172
|
|
A reaction:
A dubious project. However, it is now agreed that there are a few (six?) basic universal facial expressions, to which these passions may correspond.
|
|
23989
|
There are six primitive passions: wonder, love, hatred, desire, joy and sadness [Descartes, by Goldie]
|
|
Full Idea:
Descartes said there are six primitive passions, namely wonder, love, hatred, desire, joy and sadness. The others are either species of these, or composed of them.
|
|
From:
report of René Descartes (The Passions of the Soul [1649], 353) by Peter Goldie - The Emotions 4 'Evidence'
|
|
A reaction:
[not sure about ref] It's a nice touch to add 'wonder', which doesn't make it onto anyone else's list.
|