13 ideas
22138 | Science rests on scholastic metaphysics, not on Hume, Kant or Carnap [Boulter] |
10528 | Definitions concern how we should speak, not how things are [Fine,K] |
10529 | If Hume's Principle can define numbers, we needn't worry about its truth [Fine,K] |
10530 | Hume's Principle is either adequate for number but fails to define properly, or vice versa [Fine,K] |
22134 | Thoughts are general, but the world isn't, so how can we think accurately? [Boulter] |
22150 | Logical possibility needs the concepts of the proposition to be adequate [Boulter] |
22139 | Experiments don't just observe; they look to see what interventions change the natural order [Boulter] |
22136 | Science begins with sufficient reason, de-animation, and the importance of nature [Boulter] |
22135 | Our concepts can never fully capture reality, but simplification does not falsify [Boulter] |
10527 | An abstraction principle should not 'inflate', producing more abstractions than objects [Fine,K] |
22152 | Aristotelians accept the analytic-synthetic distinction [Boulter] |
22156 | The facts about human health are the measure of the values in our lives [Boulter] |
16709 | Some people return to scholastic mysterious qualities, disguising them as 'forces' [Leibniz] |