66 ideas
| 3695 | Philosophy is a priori if it is anything [Bonjour] |
| 3651 | Perceiving necessary connections is the essence of reasoning [Bonjour] |
| 3700 | Coherence can't be validated by appeal to coherence [Bonjour] |
| 8893 | For any given area, there seem to be a huge number of possible coherent systems of beliefs [Bonjour] |
| 17750 | The first clear proof of the consistency of the first order predicate logic was in 1928 [Hilbert/Ackermann, by Walicki] |
| 4261 | The Lottery Paradox says each ticket is likely to lose, so there probably won't be a winner [Bonjour, by PG] |
| 22886 | The modern idea of 'limit' allows infinite quantities to have a finite sum [Bardon] |
| 22914 | An equally good question would be why there was nothing instead of something [Bardon] |
| 3697 | The concept of possibility is prior to that of necessity [Bonjour] |
| 8888 | The concept of knowledge is so confused that it is best avoided [Bonjour] |
| 8887 | It is hard to give the concept of 'self-evident' a clear and defensible characterization [Bonjour] |
| 8897 | The adverbial account will still be needed when a mind apprehends its sense-data [Bonjour] |
| 3707 | Our rules of thought can only be judged by pure rational insight [Bonjour] |
| 3704 | Moderate rationalists believe in fallible a priori justification [Bonjour] |
| 4255 | Externalist theories of knowledge are one species of foundationalism [Bonjour] |
| 4257 | The big problem for foundationalism is to explain how basic beliefs are possible [Bonjour] |
| 8896 | Conscious states have built-in awareness of content, so we know if a conceptual description of it is correct [Bonjour] |
| 3696 | A priori justification requires understanding but no experience [Bonjour] |
| 3706 | A priori justification can vary in degree [Bonjour] |
| 3703 | You can't explain away a priori justification as analyticity, and you can't totally give it up [Bonjour] |
| 4256 | The main argument for foundationalism is that all other theories involve a regress leading to scepticism [Bonjour] |
| 3699 | The induction problem blocks any attempted proof of physical statements [Bonjour] |
| 21506 | A coherence theory of justification can combine with a correspondence theory of truth [Bonjour] |
| 21509 | There will always be a vast number of equally coherent but rival systems [Bonjour] |
| 21503 | Empirical coherence must attribute reliability to spontaneous experience [Bonjour] |
| 21504 | The best explanation of coherent observations is they are caused by and correspond to reality [Bonjour] |
| 21511 | A well written novel cannot possibly match a real belief system for coherence [Bonjour] |
| 21510 | The objection that a negated system is equally coherent assume that coherence is consistency [Bonjour] |
| 21505 | A coherent system can be justified with initial beliefs lacking all credibility [Bonjour] |
| 8891 | My incoherent beliefs about art should not undermine my very coherent beliefs about physics [Bonjour] |
| 8892 | Coherence seems to justify empirical beliefs about externals when there is no external input [Bonjour] |
| 8894 | Coherentists must give a reason why coherent justification is likely to lead to the truth [Bonjour] |
| 4258 | Extreme externalism says no more justification is required than the truth of the belief [Bonjour] |
| 3701 | Externalist theories of justification don't require believers to have reasons for their beliefs [Bonjour] |
| 8889 | Reliabilists disagree over whether some further requirement is needed to produce knowledge [Bonjour] |
| 4259 | External reliability is not enough, if the internal state of the believer is known to be irrational [Bonjour] |
| 8890 | If the reliable facts producing a belief are unknown to me, my belief is not rational or responsible [Bonjour] |
| 4260 | Even if there is no obvious irrationality, it may be irrational to base knowledge entirely on external criteria [Bonjour] |
| 3702 | Externalism means we have no reason to believe, which is strong scepticism [Bonjour] |
| 21508 | Anomalies challenge the claim that the basic explanations are actually basic [Bonjour] |
| 3709 | Induction must go beyond the evidence, in order to explain why the evidence occurred [Bonjour] |
| 8895 | If neither the first-level nor the second-level is itself conscious, there seems to be no consciousness present [Bonjour] |
| 3708 | All thought represents either properties or indexicals [Bonjour] |
| 3698 | Indeterminacy of translation is actually indeterminacy of meaning and belief [Bonjour] |
| 22902 | Why does an effect require a prior event if the prior event isn't a cause? [Bardon] |
| 22905 | Becoming disordered is much easier for a system than becoming ordered [Bardon] |
| 22913 | The universe expands, so space-time is enlarging [Bardon] |
| 22889 | We should treat time as adverbial, so we don't experience time, we experience things temporally [Bardon, by Bardon] |
| 22900 | How can we question the passage of time, if the question takes time to ask? [Bardon] |
| 22898 | What is time's passage relative to, and how fast does it pass? [Bardon] |
| 22897 | The A-series says a past event is becoming more past, but how can it do that? [Bardon] |
| 22901 | The B-series needs a revised view of causes, laws and explanations [Bardon] |
| 22896 | The B-series is realist about time, but idealist about its passage [Bardon] |
| 22903 | The B-series adds directionality when it accepts 'earlier' and 'later' [Bardon] |
| 22910 | To define time's arrow by causation, we need a timeless definition of causation [Bardon] |
| 22909 | We judge memories to be of the past because the events cause the memories [Bardon] |
| 22904 | The psychological arrow of time is the direction from our memories to our anticipations [Bardon] |
| 22906 | The direction of entropy is probabilistic, not necessary, so cannot be identical to time's arrow [Bardon] |
| 22907 | It is arbitrary to reverse time in a more orderly universe, but not in a sub-system of it [Bardon] |
| 22883 | It seems hard to understand change without understanding time first [Bardon] |
| 22890 | We experience static states (while walking round a house) and observe change (ship leaving dock) [Bardon] |
| 22884 | The motion of a thing should be a fact in the present moment [Bardon] |
| 22892 | Experiences of motion may be overlapping, thus stretching out the experience [Bardon] |
| 22911 | At least eternal time gives time travellers a possible destination [Bardon] |
| 22912 | Time travel is not a paradox if we include it in the eternal continuum of events [Bardon] |
| 22882 | We use calendars for the order of events, and clocks for their passing [Bardon] |