Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Herodotus, Mark Rowlands and Erik J. Olsson

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


23 ideas

1. Philosophy / H. Continental Philosophy / 4. Linguistic Structuralism
Structuralism is neo-Kantian idealism, with language playing the role of categories of understanding [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: Structuralism is a form of neo-Kantian idealism, in which the job of creating Kant's phenomenal world has been taken over by language instead of forms of sensibility and categories of the understanding.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.3)
     A reaction: A helpful connection, which explains my aversion to any attempt at understanding the world simply by analysing language, either in its ordinary usage, or in its underlying logical form.
5. Theory of Logic / D. Assumptions for Logic / 1. Bivalence
If bivalence is rejected, then excluded middle must also be rejected [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: If you reject the principle of bivalence (that a proposition is either determinately true or false), then statements are also not subject to the Law of Excluded Middle (P or not-P).
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.3)
     A reaction: I think Rowlands is wrong about this. Excluded Middle could be purely syntacti, or its semantics could be 'True or Not-True'. Only bivalent excluded middle introduces 'True or False'. Compare Idea 4752.
7. Existence / C. Structure of Existence / 5. Supervenience / a. Nature of supervenience
Supervenience is a one-way relation of dependence or determination between properties [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: Supervenience is essentially a one-way relation of dependence or determination, …which holds, in the first instance, between properties.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.2)
     A reaction: This definition immediately shows why supervenient properties are in danger of being epiphenomenal (i.e. causally irrelevant). Carefully thought about the notion of a 'one-way' relation will, I think, make it more obscure rather than clearer.
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 8. Parts of Objects / c. Wholes from parts
It is argued that wholes possess modal and counterfactual properties that parts lack [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: Some have argued that a mereological whole should not be identified with the sum of its parts on the grounds that the former possess certain properties - specifically modal and (perhaps) counterfactual properties - that the latter lacks.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.2)
     A reaction: I am not convinced that modal and counterfactual claims should count as properties. If my pen is heated it melts (a property), but if my pen were intelligent it could do philosophy. Intelligence is a property, but the situation isn't.
9. Objects / F. Identity among Objects / 4. Type Identity
Tokens are dated, concrete particulars; types are their general properties or kinds [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: Tokens are dated, concrete, particular occurrences or instances; types are the general properties that these occurrences exemplify or the kinds to which they belong.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.2)
     A reaction: It might be said that types are sets, of which tokens are the members. The question of 'general properties' raises the question of whether universals must exist to make kinds possible.
11. Knowledge Aims / C. Knowing Reality / 3. Idealism / a. Idealism
Strong idealism is the sort of mess produced by a Cartesian separation of mind and world [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: Neo-Kantian idealism, and the excesses of recent versions of it, are precisely the sort of mess one can get oneself into through an uncritical acceptance of the dichotomizing of mind and world along Cartesian internalist lines.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.3)
     A reaction: I am unconvinced that internalism about the mind (that its contents can be defined without reference to anything external) leads to this disastrous split. We don't have to abandon the links between an internal mind and the world.
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 5. Coherentism / a. Coherence as justification
Incoherence may be more important for enquiry than coherence [Olsson]
     Full Idea: While coherence may lack the positive role many have assigned to it, ...incoherence plays an important negative role in our enquiries.
     From: Erik J. Olsson (Against Coherence [2005], 10.1)
     A reaction: [He cites Peirce as the main source for this idea] We can hardly by deeply impressed by incoherence if we have no sense of coherence. Incoherence is just one of many markers for theory failure. Missing the target, bad concepts...
Coherence is the capacity to answer objections [Olsson]
     Full Idea: According to Lehrer, coherence should be understood in terms of the capacity to answer objections.
     From: Erik J. Olsson (Against Coherence [2005], 9)
     A reaction: [Keith Lehrer 1990] We can connect this with the Greek requirement of being able to give an account [logos], which is the hallmark of understanding. I take coherence to be the best method of achieving understanding. Any understanding meets Lehrer's test.
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 5. Coherentism / c. Coherentism critique
Mere agreement of testimonies is not enough to make truth very likely [Olsson]
     Full Idea: Far from guaranteeing a high likelihood of truth by itself, testimonial agreement can apparently do so only if the circumstances are favourable as regards independence, prior probability, and individual credibility.
     From: Erik J. Olsson (Against Coherence [2005], 1)
     A reaction: This is Olson's main thesis. His targets are C.I.Lewis and Bonjour, who hoped that a mere consensus of evidence would increase verisimilitude. I don't see a problem for coherence in general, since his favourable circumstances are part of it.
Coherence is only needed if the information sources are not fully reliable [Olsson]
     Full Idea: An enquirer who is fortunate enough to have at his or her disposal fully reliable information sources has no use for coherence, the need for which arises only in the context of less than fully reliable informations sources.
     From: Erik J. Olsson (Against Coherence [2005], 2.6.2)
     A reaction: I take this to be entirely false. How do you assess reliability? 'I've seen it with my own eyes'. Why trust your eyes? In what visibility conditions do you begin to doubt your eyes? Why do rational people mistrust their intuitions?
A purely coherent theory cannot be true of the world without some contact with the world [Olsson]
     Full Idea: The Input Objection says a pure coherence theory would seem to allow that a system of beliefs be justified in spite of being utterly out of contact with the world it purports to describe, so long as it is, to a sufficient extent, coherent.
     From: Erik J. Olsson (Against Coherence [2005], 4.1)
     A reaction: Olson seems impressed by this objection, but I don't see how a system could be coherently about the world if it had no known contact with the world. Olson seems to ignore meta-coherence, which evaluates the status of the system being studied.
Extending a system makes it less probable, so extending coherence can't make it more probable [Olsson]
     Full Idea: Any non-trivial extension of a belief system is less probable than the original system, but there are extensions that are more coherent than the original system. Hence more coherence does not imply a higher probability.
     From: Erik J. Olsson (Against Coherence [2005], 6.4)
     A reaction: [Olson cites Klein and Warfield 1994; compressed] The example rightly says the extension could have high internal coherence, but not whether the extension is coherent with the system being extended.
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 1. Mind / c. Features of mind
Minds are rational, conscious, subjective, self-knowing, free, meaningful and self-aware [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: The apparent features of mind which are not obviously physical include: rationality, thought, consciousness, subjectivity, infallible first-person knowledge, freedom, meaning and self-awareness.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.2)
     A reaction: A helpful list, some of which can be challenged. Ryle challenges first-person infallibility. Hume challenges self-awareness. Quine challenges meaning. Lots of people (e.g. Spinoza) challenge freedom. The Churchlands seem to challenge consciousness.
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 6. Anti-Individualism
Content externalism implies that we do not have privileged access to our own minds [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: Content externalism threatens the idea of first-person authority in all its forms, and does so because it calls into question the idea that the access we have to our own mental states is privileged in the way required for such authority.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.7)
     A reaction: I am inclined to respond by saying that since we clearly have privileged access to our own minds, that means there must be something wrong with content externalism.
If someone is secretly transported to Twin Earth, others know their thoughts better than they do [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: If someone knew that a thinker had, without realising it, been transported to Twin Earth, they would almost certainly be a higher authority on the content of the thinker's thoughts than would the thinker.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.8)
     A reaction: They would certainly be a higher authority on the truth of the thinker's thoughts, but only in the way that you might think I hold a diamond when I know it is a club. If the thinker believes it is H2O, the fact that it isn't is irrelevant to content.
17. Mind and Body / D. Property Dualism / 5. Supervenience of mind
Supervenience of mental and physical properties often comes with token-identity of mental and physical particulars [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: One often finds a supervenience thesis concerning the relation between mental and physical properties combined with a token identity theory concerning the relation between mental and physical particulars.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.2)
     A reaction: This brings out the important clarifying point that supervenience is said to be between properties, not substances. The point is that supervenience will always cry out for an explanation, preferably a sensible one.
18. Thought / C. Content / 1. Content
The content of a thought is just the meaning of a sentence [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: The content of the thought that the sky is blue is simply the meaning of the sentence "The sky is blue".
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.5)
     A reaction: This seems to imply that it is logically impossible for a non-language-speaker, such as a chimpanzee, to think that the sky is the same colour as the water. If we allow propositions, we might be able to keep meanings without the sentences.
20. Action / A. Definition of Action / 4. Action as Movement
Action is bodily movement caused by intentional states [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: An action is a bodily movement that is caused by intentional states such as beliefs, desires and so on.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.5)
     A reaction: A useful definition, and clearly one that has no truck with attempts at giving behaviourist definitions of action. The definition of a 'moral action' needs to be built on this one. Particular types of belief and desire, presumably.
22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 2. Source of Ethics / c. Ethical intuitionism
Moral intuition seems unevenly distributed between people [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: The faculty of moral intuition seems to be unevenly distributed between people.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.11)
     A reaction: This would be a good argument if it was thought that the source of moral intuitions was divine, but people vary enormously in their intuitions about maths, about character, about danger. If you believe in any intuition at all, you must accept its variety.
26. Natural Theory / A. Speculations on Nature / 6. Early Matter Theories / g. Atomism
The 17th century reintroduced atoms as mathematical modes of Euclidean space [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: The seventeenth century revolution reintroduced the classical concept of the atom in somewhat new attire as an essentially mathematical entity whose primary qualities could be precisely quantified as modes or aspects of Euclidean space.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.2)
     A reaction: Obviously this very abstract view of atoms didn't last, once they began to identify specific physical atoms, such as oxygen. This view fits in with Newton's use of pure (abstract) points such as the 'centre of gravity'.
26. Natural Theory / B. Natural Kinds / 2. Defining Kinds
Natural kinds are defined by their real essence, as in gold having atomic number 79 [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: Part of what it means to be a natural kind is that they are defined by a real essence, a constitution that marks them out as the substance they are (as water is essentially H2O, and gold essentially has atomic number 79).
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.6)
     A reaction: A 'real essence' would be the opposite of a 'conventional essence', which is just a human way of seeing things.
27. Natural Reality / G. Biology / 4. Ecology
It is common to see the value of nature in one feature, such as life, diversity, or integrity [Rowlands]
     Full Idea: In recent environmental philosophy it is common to see the value of nature identified with one or another natural feature of the environment: life, diversity, ecosystemic integrity and so on.
     From: Mark Rowlands (Externalism [2003], Ch.11)
     A reaction: This thought seems to be asking for the Open Question argument. What is so good about life, or diversity? Our strongest intuition must be that the survival of the ecosystem, and whatever makes that possible, is the highest value.
29. Religion / D. Religious Issues / 2. Immortality / a. Immortality
The Egyptians were the first to say the soul is immortal and reincarnated [Herodotus]
     Full Idea: The Egyptians were the first to claim that the soul of a human being is immortal, and that each time the body dies the soul enters another creature just as it is being born.
     From: Herodotus (The Histories [c.435 BCE], 2.123.2)