|
13453
|
Perhaps second-order quantifications cover concepts of objects, rather than plain objects [Rayo/Uzquiano]
|
|
Full Idea:
If one thought of second-order quantification as quantification over first-level Fregean concepts [note: one under which only objects fall], talk of domains might be regimented as talk of first-level concepts, which are not objects.
|
|
From:
Rayo,A/Uzquiasno,G (Introduction to 'Absolute Generality' [2006], 1.2.2)
|
|
A reaction:
That is (I take it), don't quantify over objects, but quantify over concepts, but only those under which known objects fall. One might thus achieve naïve comprehension without paradoxes. Sound like fun.
|
|
14080
|
Are causal descriptions part of the causal theory of reference, or are they just metasemantic? [Kaplan, by Schaffer,J]
|
|
Full Idea:
Kaplan notes that the causal theory of reference can be understood in two quite different ways, as part of the semantics (involving descriptions of causal processes), or as metasemantics, explaining why a term has the referent it does.
|
|
From:
report of David Kaplan (Dthat [1970]) by Jonathan Schaffer - Deflationary Metaontology of Thomasson 1
|
|
A reaction:
[Kaplan 'Afterthought' 1989] The theory tends to be labelled as 'direct' rather than as 'causal' these days, but causal chains are still at the heart of the story (even if more diffused socially). Nice question. Kaplan takes the meta- version as orthodox.
|
|
13448
|
The domain of an assertion is restricted by context, either semantically or pragmatically [Rayo/Uzquiano]
|
|
Full Idea:
We generally take an assertion's domain of discourse to be implicitly restricted by context. [Note: the standard approach is that this restriction is a semantic phenomenon, but Kent Bach (2000) argues that it is a pragmatic phenomenon]
|
|
From:
Rayo,A/Uzquiasno,G (Introduction to 'Absolute Generality' [2006], 1.1)
|
|
A reaction:
I think Kent Bach is very very right about this. Follow any conversation, and ask what the domain is at any moment. The reference of a word like 'they' can drift across things, with no semantics to guide us, but only clues from context and common sense.
|
|
7590
|
Consequentialism emphasises value rather than obligation in morality [Scruton]
|
|
Full Idea:
According to consequentialism, the fundamental concept of morality is not obligation (deontological ethics) but value (axiological ethics).
|
|
From:
Roger Scruton (A Dictionary of Political Thought [1982], 'consequentialism')
|
|
A reaction:
These two views could come dramatically apart, in wartime, or in big ecological crises, or in a family breakup, or in religious disputes. Having identified the pair so clearly, why can we not aim for a civilised (virtuous) balance between the two?
|
|
7589
|
Altruism is either emotional (where your interests are mine) or moral (where they are reasons for me) [Scruton]
|
|
Full Idea:
Two distinct motives go by the name of altruism: the emotions of liking, love and friendship, making another's interest automatically mine; and the moral motive of respect or considerateness, where another's interests become reasons for me, but not mine.
|
|
From:
Roger Scruton (A Dictionary of Political Thought [1982], 'altruism')
|
|
A reaction:
The second one has a strongly Kantian flavour, with its notion of impersonal duty. Virtue theorists will aspire to achieve the first state rather than the second, because good actions are then actively desired, and give pleasure to the doer.
|
|
7593
|
Liberals focus on universal human freedom, natural rights, and tolerance [Scruton, by PG]
|
|
Full Idea:
Liberalism believes (roughly) in the supremacy of the individual, who has freedom and natural rights; it focuses on human, not divine affairs; it claims rights and duties are universal; and it advocates tolerance in religion and morality.
|
|
From:
report of Roger Scruton (A Dictionary of Political Thought [1982], 'liberalism') by PG - Db (ideas)
|
|
A reaction:
I find it hard to disagree with these principles, but the upshot in practice is often an excessive commitment to freedom and tolerance, because people fail to realise the subtle long-term erosions of society that can result.
|
|
7587
|
The issue of abortion seems insoluble, because there is nothing with which to compare it [Scruton]
|
|
Full Idea:
The issue of abortion is intractable, partly because of the absence of any other case to which it can be assimilated.
|
|
From:
Roger Scruton (A Dictionary of Political Thought [1982], 'abortion')
|
|
A reaction:
This is the legalistic approach to the problem, which always looks for precedents and comparisons. All problems must hav solutions, though (mustn't they?). The problem, though, is not the value of the foetus, but the unique form of 'ownership'.
|