Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'A Structural Account of Mathematics', 'Causality: Reductionism versus Realism' and 'Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion'

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


44 ideas

2. Reason / E. Argument / 3. Analogy
An analogy begins to break down as soon as the two cases differ [Hume]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 3. Types of Set / b. Empty (Null) Set
Realists about sets say there exists a null set in the real world, with no members [Chihara]
We only know relational facts about the empty set, but nothing intrinsic [Chihara]
In simple type theory there is a hierarchy of null sets [Chihara]
The null set is a structural position which has no other position in membership relation [Chihara]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 3. Types of Set / c. Unit (Singleton) Sets
What is special about Bill Clinton's unit set, in comparison with all the others? [Chihara]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 5. Conceptions of Set / a. Sets as existing
The set theorist cannot tell us what 'membership' is [Chihara]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 7. Natural Sets
ZFU refers to the physical world, when it talks of 'urelements' [Chihara]
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 8. Critique of Set Theory
A pack of wolves doesn't cease when one member dies [Chihara]
5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 6. Relations in Logic
The mathematics of relations is entirely covered by ordered pairs [Chihara]
5. Theory of Logic / K. Features of Logics / 2. Consistency
Sentences are consistent if they can all be true; for Frege it is that no contradiction can be deduced [Chihara]
6. Mathematics / B. Foundations for Mathematics / 3. Axioms for Geometry
Analytic geometry gave space a mathematical structure, which could then have axioms [Chihara]
6. Mathematics / B. Foundations for Mathematics / 7. Mathematical Structuralism / c. Nominalist structuralism
We can replace existence of sets with possibility of constructing token sentences [Chihara, by MacBride]
7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 11. Ontological Commitment / e. Ontological commitment problems
If a successful theory confirms mathematics, presumably a failed theory disconfirms it? [Chihara]
No scientific explanation would collapse if mathematical objects were shown not to exist [Chihara]
12. Knowledge Sources / D. Empiricism / 4. Pro-Empiricism
Events are baffling before experience, and obvious after experience [Hume]
18. Thought / E. Abstraction / 7. Abstracta by Equivalence
I prefer the open sentences of a Constructibility Theory, to Platonist ideas of 'equivalence classes' [Chihara]
19. Language / B. Reference / 3. Direct Reference / b. Causal reference
Mathematical entities are causally inert, so the causal theory of reference won't work for them [Chihara]
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 4. Naturalised causation
Reductionists can't explain accidents, uninstantiated laws, probabilities, or the existence of any laws [Tooley]
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 8. Particular Causation / e. Probabilistic causation
Quantum physics suggests that the basic laws of nature are probabilistic [Tooley]
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 4. Standard Model / a. Concept of matter
'Gunk' is an individual possessing no parts that are atoms [Chihara]
28. God / A. Divine Nature / 3. Divine Perfections
We can't assume God's perfections are like our ideas or like human attributes [Hume]
28. God / B. Proving God / 1. Proof of God
The objects of theological reasoning are too big for our minds [Hume]
28. God / B. Proving God / 2. Proofs of Reason / b. Ontological Proof critique
No being's non-existence can imply a contradiction, so its existence cannot be proved a priori [Hume]
28. God / B. Proving God / 3. Proofs of Evidence / a. Cosmological Proof
A chain of events requires a cause for the whole as well as the parts, yet the chain is just a sum of parts [Hume]
If something must be necessary so that something exists rather than nothing, why can't the universe be necessary? [Hume]
28. God / B. Proving God / 3. Proofs of Evidence / b. Teleological Proof
The thing which contains order must be God, so see God where you see order [Hume]
28. God / B. Proving God / 3. Proofs of Evidence / c. Teleological Proof critique
How can we pronounce on a whole after a brief look at a very small part? [Hume]
Analogy suggests that God has a very great human mind [Hume]
The universe may be the result of trial-and-error [Hume]
Order may come from an irrational source as well as a rational one [Hume]
Design cannot prove a unified Deity. Many men make a city, so why not many gods for a world? [Hume]
From a ship you would judge its creator a genius, not a mere humble workman [Hume]
This excellent world may be the result of a huge sequence of trial-and-error [Hume]
Humans renew their species sexually. If there are many gods, would they not do the same? [Hume]
Creation is more like vegetation than human art, so it won't come from reason [Hume]
This Creator god might be an infant or incompetent or senile [Hume]
Motion often begins in matter, with no sign of a controlling agent [Hume]
The universe could settle into superficial order, without a designer [Hume]
Ideas arise from objects, not vice versa; ideas only influence matter if they are linked [Hume]
A surprise feature of all products of 9 looks like design, but is actually a necessity [Hume]
From our limited view, we cannot tell if the universe is faulty [Hume]
If the divine cause is proportional to its effects, the effects are finite, so the Deity cannot be infinite [Hume]
Why would we infer an infinite creator from a finite creation? [Hume]