Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Rescher,N/Oppenheim,P, David Fair and Hugh LaFollette

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


9 ideas

9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 8. Parts of Objects / c. Wholes from parts
A whole must have one characteristic, an internal relation, and a structure [Rescher/Oppenheim]
     Full Idea: A whole must possess an attribute peculiar to and characteristic of it as a whole; there must be a characteristic relation of dependence between the parts; and the whole must have some structure which gives it characteristics.
     From: Rescher,N/Oppenheim,P (Logical Analysis of Gestalt Concepts [1955], p.90), quoted by Peter Simons - Parts 9.2
     A reaction: Simons says these are basically sensible conditions, and tries to fill them out. They seem a pretty good start, and I must resist the temptation to rush to borderline cases.
20. Action / C. Motives for Action / 5. Action Dilemmas / a. Dilemmas
Errors in moral practice might be inconsistent or inappropriate principles, or inappropriate application [LaFollette]
     Full Idea: I might make parallel 'mistakes' in ethical deliberation. For instance I might 1) use inconsistent ethical principles, 2) have inappropriate moral standards, and 3) apply moral standards inappropriately.
     From: Hugh LaFollette (Introductions in 'Ethics in Practice' [2002], p.005)
     A reaction: I would want to get the word 'values' in there somewhere. Dogmatic application of moral rules might indicate a failure of values.
We can discuss the criteria of a judgment, or the weight given to them, or their application [LaFollette]
     Full Idea: In discussing a movie you can challenge my criteria, the weight I give to those criteria, or my application of the criteria (the claim that the movie satisfies the criteria).
     From: Hugh LaFollette (Introductions in 'Ethics in Practice' [2002], p.008)
     A reaction: I can't think of anything missing here, so it is a helpful start.
20. Action / C. Motives for Action / 5. Action Dilemmas / c. Omissions
The act/omission distinction is important for duties, but less so for consequences [LaFollette]
     Full Idea: Consequentialists, unlike deontologists, are unlikely to think that the act/omission distinction is fundamentally important.
     From: Hugh LaFollette (Introductions in 'Ethics in Practice' [2002], p.021)
     A reaction: Not sure where virtue theory fits in here. Virtues tend to be applied more locally, where duty tends to be global. All moral theories must acknowledge that failure to act may be either a good or a bad thing, depending on circumstances
23. Ethics / D. Deontological Ethics / 2. Duty
Are we only obligated by agreement, or should we always help the weak? [LaFollette]
     Full Idea: A fundamental question in morality is whether we are obligated to help only those we specifically agreed to help, or are we obligated to help others in need, because they are vulnerable?
     From: Hugh LaFollette (Introductions in 'Ethics in Practice' [2002], p.061)
     A reaction: [He is considering J.J. Thomson's defence of abortion] The first option sounds extraordinary. If I don't make any agreements at all, then I cease to be a moral being? Not help strangers when they fall over?
25. Social Practice / C. Rights / 2. Moral rights
Too many options may open us to unwanted pressures, like being paid very little [LaFollette]
     Full Idea: Having options is not an unadulterated good. Options may make us vulnerable to unwanted pressure from others. For example, having the option to work for less than the minimum wage increases the chances of employers offering less.
     From: Hugh LaFollette (Introductions in 'Ethics in Practice' [2002], p.019)
     A reaction: [J.D. Velleman is cited for this] A nice point, beginning to articulate my growing feeling that although freedom is generally a virtue, it is the most overrated virtue.
Should people be forced to make choices? [LaFollette]
     Full Idea: Should we give people choices they might not want to have?
     From: Hugh LaFollette (Introductions in 'Ethics in Practice' [2002], p.020)
     A reaction: In personal life we encounter people who force us to make an unwanted choice (choose the wine, when you know nothing about wine). Politically, there is the sneaky move of giving unwanted choices, to disguise absence of desired choices.
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 4. Naturalised causation
Science has shown that causal relations are just transfers of energy or momentum [Fair, by Sosa/Tooley]
     Full Idea: Basic causal relations can, as a consequence of our scientific knowledge, be identified with certain physicalistic [sic] relations between objects that can be characterized in terms of transference of either energy or momentum between objects.
     From: report of David Fair (Causation and the Flow of Energy [1979]) by E Sosa / M Tooley - Introduction to 'Causation' §1
     A reaction: Presumably a transfer of momentum is a transfer of energy. If only anyone had the foggiest idea what energy actually is, we'd be doing well. What is energy made of? 'No identity without substance', I say. I like Fair's idea.
Fair shifted his view to talk of counterfactuals about energy flow [Fair, by Schaffer,J]
     Full Idea: Fair, who originated the energy flow view of causation, moved to a view that understands connection in terms of counterfactuals about energy flow.
     From: report of David Fair (Causation and the Flow of Energy [1979]) by Jonathan Schaffer - The Metaphysics of Causation 2.1.2
     A reaction: David Fair was a pupil of David Lewis, the king of the counterfactual view. To me that sounds like a disappointing move, but it is hard to think that a mere flow of energy through space would amount to causation. Cause must work back from an effect.