149 ideas
| 21887 | Derrida focuses on other philosophers, rather than on science [Derrida] |
| 21888 | Philosophy is just a linguistic display [Derrida] |
| 21896 | Philosophy aims to build foundations for thought [Derrida, by May] |
| 21893 | Philosophy is necessarily metaphorical, and its writing is aesthetic [Derrida] |
| 21892 | Interpretations can be interpreted, so there is no original 'meaning' available [Derrida] |
| 20925 | Hermeneutics blunts truth, by conforming it to the interpreter [Derrida, by Zimmermann,J] |
| 20934 | Hermeneutics is hostile, trying to overcome the other person's difference [Derrida, by Zimmermann,J] |
| 21895 | Structuralism destroys awareness of dynamic meaning [Derrida] |
| 21934 | The idea of being as persistent presence, and meaning as conscious intelligibility, are self-destructive [Derrida, by Glendinning] |
| 21883 | Sincerity can't be verified, so fiction infuses speech, and hence reality also [Derrida] |
| 21882 | Sentences are contradictory, as they have opposite meanings in some contexts [Derrida] |
| 21881 | We aim to explore the limits of expression (as in Mallarmé's poetry) [Derrida] |
| 11283 | There is pure deductive reasoning, and explanatory demonstration reasoning [Aristotle, by Politis] |
| 1672 | Maybe everything could be demonstrated, if demonstration can be reciprocal or circular [Aristotle] |
| 1684 | Two falsehoods can be contrary to one another [Aristotle] |
| 12145 | Definitions are of what something is, and that is universal [Aristotle] |
| 12384 | Definition by division needs predicates, which are well ordered and thorough [Aristotle] |
| 12075 | An Aristotelian definition is causal [Aristotle, by Witt] |
| 9066 | You can define objects by progressively identifying what is the same and what is different [Aristotle] |
| 12382 | What it is and why it is are the same; screening defines and explains an eclipse [Aristotle] |
| 18137 | Impredicative definitions are wrong, because they change the set that is being defined? [Bostock] |
| 4756 | Derrida says that all truth-talk is merely metaphor [Derrida, by Engel] |
| 21877 | True thoughts are inaccessible, in the subconscious, prior to speech or writing [Derrida] |
| 1668 | An axiom is a principle which must be understood if one is to learn anything [Aristotle] |
| 18122 | Classical interdefinitions of logical constants and quantifiers is impossible in intuitionism [Bostock] |
| 18114 | There is no single agreed structure for set theory [Bostock] |
| 18107 | A 'proper class' cannot be a member of anything [Bostock] |
| 18115 | We could add axioms to make sets either as small or as large as possible [Bostock] |
| 18139 | The Axiom of Choice relies on reference to sets that we are unable to describe [Bostock] |
| 18105 | Replacement enforces a 'limitation of size' test for the existence of sets [Bostock] |
| 18109 | The completeness of first-order logic implies its compactness [Bostock] |
| 18108 | First-order logic is not decidable: there is no test of whether any formula is valid [Bostock] |
| 12376 | Demonstrations by reductio assume excluded middle [Aristotle] |
| 12373 | Something holds universally when it is proved of an arbitrary and primitive case [Aristotle] |
| 12363 | Everything is either asserted or denied truly [Aristotle] |
| 21878 | Names have a subjective aspect, especially the role of our own name [Derrida] |
| 21889 | 'I' is the perfect name, because it denotes without description [Derrida] |
| 21879 | Even Kripke can't explain names; the word is the thing, and the thing is the word [Derrida] |
| 18123 | Substitutional quantification is just standard if all objects in the domain have a name [Bostock] |
| 18120 | The Deduction Theorem is what licenses a system of natural deduction [Bostock] |
| 13004 | Aristotle's axioms (unlike Euclid's) are assumptions awaiting proof [Aristotle, by Leibniz] |
| 18125 | Berry's Paradox considers the meaning of 'The least number not named by this name' [Bostock] |
| 12377 | Mathematics is concerned with forms, not with superficial properties [Aristotle] |
| 12372 | The essence of a triangle comes from the line, mentioned in any account of triangles [Aristotle] |
| 18100 | ω + 1 is a new ordinal, but its cardinality is unchanged [Bostock] |
| 18101 | Each addition changes the ordinality but not the cardinality, prior to aleph-1 [Bostock] |
| 18102 | A cardinal is the earliest ordinal that has that number of predecessors [Bostock] |
| 18106 | Aleph-1 is the first ordinal that exceeds aleph-0 [Bostock] |
| 18095 | Instead of by cuts or series convergence, real numbers could be defined by axioms [Bostock] |
| 18099 | The number of reals is the number of subsets of the natural numbers [Bostock] |
| 18093 | For Eudoxus cuts in rationals are unique, but not every cut makes a real number [Bostock] |
| 12369 | A unit is what is quantitatively indivisible [Aristotle] |
| 18110 | Infinitesimals are not actually contradictory, because they can be non-standard real numbers [Bostock] |
| 18156 | Modern axioms of geometry do not need the real numbers [Bostock] |
| 18097 | The Peano Axioms describe a unique structure [Bostock] |
| 18149 | There are many criteria for the identity of numbers [Bostock] |
| 18148 | Hume's Principle is a definition with existential claims, and won't explain numbers [Bostock] |
| 18145 | Many things will satisfy Hume's Principle, so there are many interpretations of it [Bostock] |
| 18143 | Frege makes numbers sets to solve the Caesar problem, but maybe Caesar is a set! [Bostock] |
| 18116 | Numbers can't be positions, if nothing decides what position a given number has [Bostock] |
| 18117 | Structuralism falsely assumes relations to other numbers are numbers' only properties [Bostock] |
| 18141 | Nominalism about mathematics is either reductionist, or fictionalist [Bostock] |
| 18157 | Nominalism as based on application of numbers is no good, because there are too many applications [Bostock] |
| 18150 | Actual measurement could never require the precision of the real numbers [Bostock] |
| 18158 | Ordinals are mainly used adjectively, as in 'the first', 'the second'... [Bostock] |
| 18127 | Simple type theory has 'levels', but ramified type theory has 'orders' [Bostock] |
| 18144 | Neo-logicists agree that HP introduces number, but also claim that it suffices for the job [Bostock] |
| 18147 | Neo-logicists meet the Caesar problem by saying Hume's Principle is unique to number [Bostock] |
| 18111 | Treating numbers as objects doesn't seem like logic, since arithmetic fixes their totality [Bostock] |
| 18129 | Many crucial logicist definitions are in fact impredicative [Bostock] |
| 18146 | If Hume's Principle is the whole story, that implies structuralism [Bostock] |
| 18159 | Higher cardinalities in sets are just fairy stories [Bostock] |
| 18155 | A fairy tale may give predictions, but only a true theory can give explanations [Bostock] |
| 18140 | The best version of conceptualism is predicativism [Bostock] |
| 18138 | Conceptualism fails to grasp mathematical properties, infinity, and objective truth values [Bostock] |
| 18133 | The usual definitions of identity and of natural numbers are impredicative [Bostock] |
| 18131 | If abstracta only exist if they are expressible, there can only be denumerably many of them [Bostock] |
| 18134 | Predicativism makes theories of huge cardinals impossible [Bostock] |
| 18135 | If mathematics rests on science, predicativism may be the best approach [Bostock] |
| 18136 | If we can only think of what we can describe, predicativism may be implied [Bostock] |
| 18132 | The predicativity restriction makes a difference with the real numbers [Bostock] |
| 18910 | To seek truth, study the real connections between subjects and attributes [Aristotle] |
| 1675 | Separate Forms aren't needed for logic, but universals (one holding of many) are essential [Aristotle] |
| 1677 | We can forget the Forms, as they are irrelevant, and not needed in giving demonstrations [Aristotle] |
| 1687 | Why are being terrestrial and a biped combined in the definition of man, but being literate and musical aren't? [Aristotle] |
| 1681 | Units are positionless substances, and points are substances with position [Aristotle] |
| 12146 | Definitions recognise essences, so are not themselves essences [Aristotle] |
| 17039 | The predicates of a thing's nature are necessary to it [Aristotle] |
| 11994 | Aristotelian essences are properties mentioned at the starting point of a science [Aristotle, by Kung] |
| 12381 | What is necessary cannot be otherwise [Aristotle] |
| 1690 | A stone travels upwards by a forced necessity, and downwards by natural necessity [Aristotle] |
| 12072 | For Aristotle knowledge is explanatory, involving understanding, and principles or causes [Aristotle, by Witt] |
| 12073 | 'Episteme' means grasping causes, universal judgments, explanation, and teaching [Aristotle, by Witt] |
| 12378 | The reason why is the key to knowledge [Aristotle] |
| 12364 | We understand a thing when we know its explanation and its necessity [Aristotle] |
| 12370 | Some understanding, of immediate items, is indemonstrable [Aristotle] |
| 12366 | We only understand something when we know its explanation [Aristotle] |
| 1685 | No one has mere belief about something if they think it HAS to be true [Aristotle] |
| 1673 | Knowledge proceeds from principles, so it is hard to know if we know [Aristotle] |
| 12379 | You cannot understand anything through perception [Aristotle] |
| 16725 | Some knowledge is lost if you lose a sense, and there is no way the knowledge can be replaced [Aristotle] |
| 1693 | Animals may have some knowledge if they retain perception, but understanding requires reasons to be given [Aristotle] |
| 23309 | Aristotle's concepts of understanding and explanation mean he is not a pure empiricist [Aristotle, by Frede,M] |
| 9067 | Many memories of the same item form a single experience [Aristotle] |
| 1671 | Sceptics say justification is an infinite regress, or it stops at the unknowable [Aristotle] |
| 1670 | When you understand basics, you can't be persuaded to change your mind [Aristotle] |
| 1680 | Demonstration is better with fewer presuppositions, and it is quicker if these are familiar [Aristotle] |
| 12147 | The principles of demonstrations are definitions [Aristotle] |
| 12383 | There must be definitions before demonstration is possible [Aristotle] |
| 24068 | Demonstration is more than entailment, as the explanatory order must match the causal order [Aristotle, by Koslicki] |
| 17310 | Aristotle gets asymmetric consequence from demonstration, which reflects real causal priority [Aristotle, by Koslicki] |
| 21359 | Aristotle doesn't actually apply his theory of demonstration to his practical science [Leroi on Aristotle] |
| 12365 | We can know by demonstration, which is a scientific deduction leading to understanding [Aristotle] |
| 1667 | Premises must be true, primitive and immediate, and prior to and explanatory of conclusions [Aristotle] |
| 10918 | Demonstrative understanding rests on necessary features of the thing in itself [Aristotle] |
| 12374 | Demonstrations must be necessary, and that depends on the middle term [Aristotle] |
| 12148 | Demonstrations are syllogisms which give explanations [Aristotle] |
| 1674 | All demonstration is concerned with existence, axioms and properties [Aristotle] |
| 1679 | Universal demonstrations are about thought; particular demonstrations lead to perceptions [Aristotle] |
| 1691 | Aim to get definitions of the primitive components, thus establishing the kind, and work towards the attributes [Aristotle] |
| 12371 | A demonstration is a deduction which proceeds from necessities [Aristotle] |
| 1683 | We learn universals from many particulars [Aristotle] |
| 12380 | Universals are valuable because they make the explanations plain [Aristotle] |
| 12367 | What is most universal is furthest away, and the particulars are nearest [Aristotle] |
| 12385 | Are particulars explained more by universals, or by other particulars? [Aristotle] |
| 1689 | Explanation is of the status of a thing, inferences to it, initiation of change, and purpose [Aristotle] |
| 1686 | What we seek and understand are facts, reasons, existence, and identity [Aristotle] |
| 12357 | Explanation and generality are inseparable [Aristotle, by Wedin] |
| 1669 | The foundation or source is stronger than the thing it causes [Aristotle] |
| 1678 | Universals give better explanations, because they are self-explanatory and primitive [Aristotle] |
| 21890 | Heidegger showed that passing time is the key to consciousness [Derrida] |
| 9068 | Perception creates primitive immediate principles by building a series of firm concepts [Aristotle] |
| 9069 | A perception lodging in the soul creates a primitive universal, which becomes generalised [Aristotle] |
| 21880 | 'Tacit theory' controls our thinking (which is why Freud is important) [Derrida] |
| 9070 | We learn primitives and universals by induction from perceptions [Aristotle] |
| 21894 | Madness and instability ('the demonic hyperbole') lurks in all language [Derrida] |
| 21886 | Meanings depend on differences and contrasts [Derrida] |
| 21930 | For Aristotle all proper nouns must have a single sense, which is the purpose of language [Derrida] |
| 21884 | Capacity for repetitions is the hallmark of language [Derrida] |
| 21935 | The sign is only conceivable as a movement between elusive presences [Derrida] |
| 21933 | Writing functions even if the sender or the receiver are absent [Derrida, by Glendinning] |
| 21931 | 'Dissemination' is opposed to polysemia, since that is irreducible, because of multiple understandings [Derrida, by Glendinning] |
| 21885 | Words exist in 'spacing', so meanings are never synchronic except in writing [Derrida] |
| 18121 | In logic a proposition means the same when it is and when it is not asserted [Bostock] |
| 12368 | Negation takes something away from something [Aristotle] |
| 1692 | If you shouldn't argue in metaphors, then you shouldn't try to define them either [Aristotle] |
| 21891 | The good is implicitly violent (against evil), so there is no pure good [Derrida] |
| 12375 | Whatever holds of a kind intrinsically holds of it necessarily [Aristotle] |
| 1688 | Properties must be proved, but not essence; but existents are not a kind, so existence isn't part of essence [Aristotle] |