Combining Texts

All the ideas for '', 'The Problem of Knowledge' and 'Habermas'

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

---

13 ideas

2. Reason / F. Fallacies / 1. Fallacy

19463	Induction assumes some uniformity in nature, or that in some respects the future is like the past [Ayer]
	Full Idea: In all inductive reasoning we make the assumption that there is a measure of uniformity in nature; or, roughly speaking, that the future will, in the appropriate respects, resemble the past.
	From: A.J. Ayer (The Problem of Knowledge [1956], 2.viii)
	A reaction: I would say that nature is 'stable'. Nature changes, so a global assumption of total uniformity is daft. Do we need some global uniformity assumptions, if the induction involved is local? I would say yes. Are all inductions conditional on this?

5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 1. Overview of Logic

11211	If a sound conclusion comes from two errors that cancel out, the path of the argument must matter [Rumfitt]
	Full Idea: If a designated conclusion follows from the premisses, but the argument involves two howlers which cancel each other out, then the moral is that the path an argument takes from premisses to conclusion does matter to its logical evaluation.
	From: Ian Rumfitt ("Yes" and "No" [2000], II)
	A reaction: The drift of this is that our view of logic should be a little closer to the reasoning of ordinary language, and we should rely a little less on purely formal accounts.

5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 2. Logical Connectives / a. Logical connectives

11210	Standardly 'and' and 'but' are held to have the same sense by having the same truth table [Rumfitt]
	Full Idea: If 'and' and 'but' really are alike in sense, in what might that likeness consist? Some philosophers of classical logic will reply that they share a sense by virtue of sharing a truth table.
	From: Ian Rumfitt ("Yes" and "No" [2000])
	A reaction: This is the standard view which Rumfitt sets out to challenge.

11212	The sense of a connective comes from primitively obvious rules of inference [Rumfitt]
	Full Idea: A connective will possess the sense that it has by virtue of its competent users' finding certain rules of inference involving it to be primitively obvious.
	From: Ian Rumfitt ("Yes" and "No" [2000], III)
	A reaction: Rumfitt cites Peacocke as endorsing this view, which characterises the logical connectives by their rules of usage rather than by their pure semantic value.

11. Knowledge Aims / B. Certain Knowledge / 5. Cogito Critique

19461	Knowing I exist reveals nothing at all about my nature [Ayer]
	Full Idea: To know that one exists is not to know anything about oneself any more than knowing that 'this' exists is knowing anything about 'this'.
	From: A.J. Ayer (The Problem of Knowledge [1956], 2.iii)
	A reaction: Descartes proceeds to define himself as a 'thinking thing', inferring that thinking is his essence. Ayer casts nice doubt on that.

19459	To say 'I am not thinking' must be false, but it might have been true, so it isn't self-contradictory [Ayer]
	Full Idea: To say 'I am not thinking' is self-stultifying since if it is said intelligently it must be false: but it is not self-contradictory. The proof that it is not self-contradictory is that it might have been false.
	From: A.J. Ayer (The Problem of Knowledge [1956], 2.iii)
	A reaction: If it doesn't imply a contradiction, then it is not a necessary truth, which is what it is normally taken to be. Is 'This is a sentence' necessarily true? It might not have been one, if the rules of English syntax changed recently.

19460	'I know I exist' has no counterevidence, so it may be meaningless [Ayer]
	Full Idea: If there is no experience at all of finding out that one is not conscious, or that one does not exist, ..it is tempting to say that sentences like 'I exist', 'I am conscious', 'I know that I exist' do not express genuine propositions.
	From: A.J. Ayer (The Problem of Knowledge [1956], 2.iii)
	A reaction: This is, of course, an application of the somewhat discredited verification principle, but the fact that strictly speaking the principle has been sort of refuted does not mean that we should not take it seriously, and be influenced by it.

14. Science / A. Basis of Science / 6. Falsification

19464	We only discard a hypothesis after one failure if it appears likely to keep on failing [Ayer]
	Full Idea: Why should a hypothesis which has failed the test be discarded unless this shows it to be unreliable; that is, having failed once it is likely to fail again? There is no contradiction in a hypothesis that was falsified being more likely to pass in future.
	From: A.J. Ayer (The Problem of Knowledge [1956], 2.viii)
	A reaction: People may become more likely to pass a test after they have failed at the first attempt. Birds which fail to fly at the first attempt usually achieve total mastery of it. There are different types of hypothesis here.

14. Science / C. Induction / 2. Aims of Induction

19462	Induction passes from particular facts to other particulars, or to general laws, non-deductively [Ayer]
	Full Idea: Inductive reasoning covers all cases in which we pass from a particular statement of fact, or set of them, to a factual conclusion which they do not formally entail. The inference may be to a general law, or by analogy to another particular instance.
	From: A.J. Ayer (The Problem of Knowledge [1956], 2.viii)
	A reaction: My preferred definition is 'learning from experience' - which I take to be the most rational behaviour you could possibly imagine. I don't think a definition should be couched in terms of 'objects' or 'particulars'.

19. Language / F. Communication / 3. Denial

11214	We learn 'not' along with affirmation, by learning to either affirm or deny a sentence [Rumfitt]
	Full Idea: The standard view is that affirming not-A is more complex than affirming the atomic sentence A itself, with the latter determining its sense. But we could learn 'not' directly, by learning at once how to either affirm A or reject A.
	From: Ian Rumfitt ("Yes" and "No" [2000], IV)
	A reaction: [compressed] This seems fairly anti-Fregean in spirit, because it looks at the psychology of how we learn 'not' as a way of clarifying what we mean by it, rather than just looking at its logical behaviour (and thus giving it a secondary role).

22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 2. Source of Ethics / b. Rational ethics

15675	We don't condemn people for being bad at reasoning [Finlayson]
	Full Idea: We do not morally disapprove of people who are incompetent reasoners.
	From: James Gordon Finlayson (Habermas [2005], Ch.6:83)
	A reaction: Well, we don't morally disapprove simply of their lack of reasoning ability, but we may morally disapprove of their actions, which have arisen entirely from the disability.

23. Ethics / D. Deontological Ethics / 3. Universalisability

15674	One can universalise good advice, but that doesn't make it an obligation [Finlayson]
	Full Idea: 'Early to bed and early to rise' is a universalizable maxim, but, though it might be good advice, there is obviously no such obligation.
	From: James Gordon Finlayson (Habermas [2005], Ch.6:83)
	A reaction: I take it that Kant's rule won't distinguish moral guidance from prudential guidance. Unfair, I think. I may be a lark, but when I universalise this maxim I see that it can't be willed as a universal rule, because we should tolerate the owls.

24. Political Theory / B. Nature of a State / 5. Culture

15662	The 'culture industry' is an advertisement for the way things are [Finlayson]
	Full Idea: Critical theory said that culture unwittingly played the role of an advertisement for the way things are. Horkheimer and Adorno referred to this phenomenon as the 'culture industry'.
	From: James Gordon Finlayson (Habermas [2005], Ch.1:04)
	A reaction: An interesting perspective. However, absolutely everything is an advertisement for what it offers. I think this is especially true of moral (and immoral) actions.