Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Necessary Existents', 'Aenesidemus' and 'works'

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


4 ideas

6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 5. The Infinite / k. Infinitesimals
Weierstrass eliminated talk of infinitesimals [Weierstrass, by Kitcher]
     Full Idea: Weierstrass effectively eliminated the infinitesimalist language of his predecessors.
     From: report of Karl Weierstrass (works [1855]) by Philip Kitcher - The Nature of Mathematical Knowledge 10.6
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 5. The Infinite / l. Limits
Weierstrass made limits central, but the existence of limits still needed to be proved [Weierstrass, by Bostock]
     Full Idea: After Weierstrass had stressed the importance of limits, one now needed to be able to prove the existence of such limits.
     From: report of Karl Weierstrass (works [1855]) by David Bostock - Philosophy of Mathematics 4.4
     A reaction: The solution to this is found in work on series (going back to Cauchy), and on Dedekind's cuts.
7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 2. Realism
Consciousness is not entirely representational, because there are pains, and the self [Schulze, by Pinkard]
     Full Idea: Schulze said Reinhold and Kant violated their own theory with the thing-in-itself, and that Reinhold was wrong that all consciousnes is representational (since pain isn't), and the self can't represent itself without a regress.
     From: report of Gottlob Schulze (Aenesidemus [1792]) by Terry Pinkard - German Philosophy 1760-1860 05
     A reaction: [my compressed version] This article demolished Reinhold, which is a shame, because if he had responded constructively to these criticisms he might have reached be best theory of his age. These are analytic style objections, by counterexample.
19. Language / D. Propositions / 3. Concrete Propositions
Propositions (such as 'that dog is barking') only exist if their items exist [Williamson]
     Full Idea: A proposition about an item exists only if that item exists... how could something be the proposition that that dog is barking in circumstances in which that dog does not exist?
     From: Timothy Williamson (Necessary Existents [2002], p.240), quoted by Trenton Merricks - Propositions
     A reaction: This is a view of propositions I can't make sense of. If I'm under an illusion that there is a dog barking nearby, when there isn't one, can I not say 'that dog is barking'? If I haven't expressed a proposition, what have I done?