Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Hermarchus, N.L. Wilson and Karl Leonhard Reinhold

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


3 ideas

12. Knowledge Sources / B. Perception / 4. Sense Data / b. Nature of sense-data
Subjects distinguish representations, as related both to subject and object [Reinhold]
     Full Idea: In consciousness the subject distinguishes the representation from the subject and object, and relates it to both.
     From: Karl Leonhard Reinhold (Foundations of Philosophical Knowledge [1791], p.78), quoted by Terry Pinkard - German Philosophy 1760-1860 04
     A reaction: This is a reminder that twentieth century analytic discussions of perception were largely recapitulating late Enlightenment German philosophy. This is a very good definition of sense-data. I can think about my representations. Reinhold was a realist.
19. Language / F. Communication / 6. Interpreting Language / c. Principle of charity
We translate in a way that makes the largest possible number of statements true [Wilson,NL]
     Full Idea: We select as designatum that individual which will make the largest possible number of statements true.
     From: N.L. Wilson (Substances without Substrata [1959]), quoted by Willard Quine - Word and Object II.§13 n
     A reaction: From the Quine's reference, it sounds as if Wilson was the originator of the well-known principle of charity, later taken up by Davidson. If so, he should be famous, because it strikes me as a piece of fundamental and important wisdom.
25. Social Practice / F. Life Issues / 6. Animal Rights
Animals are dangerous and nourishing, and can't form contracts of justice [Hermarchus, by Sedley]
     Full Idea: Hermarchus said that animal killing is justified by considerations of human safety and nourishment and by animals' inability to form contractual relations of justice with us.
     From: report of Hermarchus (fragments/reports [c.270 BCE]) by David A. Sedley - Hermarchus
     A reaction: Could the last argument be used to justify torturing animals? Or could we eat a human who was too brain-damaged to form contracts?