Search results for 'Cogency' (try it on Scholar)

211 found
Order:
  1. C. J. G. Wright (2000). Cogency and Question-Begging: Some Reflections on McKinsey's Paradox and Putnam's Proof. Philosophical Issues 10 (s1):140-63.
  2.  64
    Katrin Flikschuh (2011). On the Cogency of Human Rights. Jurisprudence 2 (1):17-36.
    This article queries the cogency of human rights reasoning in the context of global justice debates, focusing on Charles Beitz's practice-based approach. By 'cogency' is meant the adequacy of human rights theorising to its intended context of application. Negatively, the author argues that Beitz's characterisation of human rights reasoning as a 'global discursive practice' lacks cogency when considered in the context of the post-colonial state system; she focuses on African decolonisation. Positively, she suggests that Beitz's gloss on (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  6
    William Rehg (2009). Cogency in Motion: Critical Contextualism and Relevance. [REVIEW] Argumentation 23 (1):39-59.
    If arguments are to generate public knowledge, as in the sciences, then they must travel, finding acceptance across a range of local contexts. But not all good arguments travel, whereas some bad arguments do. Under what conditions may we regard the capacity of an argument to travel as a sign of its cogency or public merits? This question is especially interesting for a contextualist approach that wants to remain critically robust: if standards of cogency are bound to local (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  4.  4
    William Rehg (2005). Assessing the Cogency of Arguments: Lbree Kinds of Merits. Informal Logic 25 (2):95-115.
    This article proposes a way of connecting two levels at which scholars have studied discursive practices from a normative perspective: on the one hand, local transactions-face-to-face arguments or dialogues-and broadly dispersed public debates on the other. To help focus my analysis, I select two representatives of work at these two levels: the pragmadialectical model of critical discussion and Habermas's discourse theory of politicallegal deliberation. The two models confront complementary challenges that arise from gaps between their prescriptions and contexts of actual (...)
    Direct download (15 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  5.  19
    G. C. Goddu (2004). Cogency and the Validation of Induction. Argumentation 18 (1):25-41.
    I.T. Oakley claims that the cogency of invalid, but cogent, arguments is context independent. Robert Pargetter and John Bigelow claim that the apparent cogency of any cogent, but invalid, argument is to be explained by the existence of a corresponding valid argument. I argue that both claims are incorrect and provide my own account of the cogency of arguments.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. John-Michael Kuczynski (2006). THE ANALOGUE-DIGITAL DISTINCTION AND THE COGENCY OF KANT'S TRANSCENDENTAL ARGUMENTS. Existentia: An International Journal of Philosophy (3-4):279-320.
    Hume's attempt to show that deduction is the only legitimate form of inference presupposes that enumerative induction is the only non-deductive form of inference. In actuality, enumerative induction is not even a form of inference: all supposed cases of enumerative induction are disguised cases of Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE), so far as they aren't simply cases of mentation of a purely associative kind and, consequently, of a kind that is non-inductive and otherwise non-inferential. The justification for IBE lies (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  15
    Isaac Levi (1965). Deductive Cogency in Inductive Inference. Journal of Philosophy 62 (3):68-77.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   44 citations  
  8.  82
    Graham Oddie (1997). Conditionalization, Cogency, and Cognitive Value. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48 (4):533-541.
  9.  18
    William Rehg (2013). Rhetoric, Cogency, and the Radically Social Character of Persuasion: Habermas's Argumentation Theory Revisited. Philosophy and Rhetoric 46 (4):465-492.
    What can rhetoric tell us about good arguments? The answer depends on what we mean by “good argument” and on how we conceive rhetoric. In this article I examine and further develop Jürgen Habermas’s argumentation theory as an answer to the question—or as I explain, an expanded version of that question. Habermas places his theory in the family of normative approaches that recognize (at least) three evaluative perspectives on all argument making: logic, dialectic, and rhetoric, which proponents loosely align with (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Crispin Wright (2000). Cogency and Question-Begging: Some Reflections on McKinsey's Paradox and Putnam's Proof. Philosophical Issues 10 (1):140-163.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  11.  1
    Crispin Wright (2000). Cogency and Question-Begging: Some Reflections on McKinsey's Paradox and Putnam's Proof. Noûs 34 (s1):140-163.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12.  7
    Paul Tidman (1992). Lehrer on a Premise of Epistemic Cogency. Philosophical Studies 67 (1):41 - 49.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  8
    John Bigelow & Robert Pargetter (1998). No Logic of Cogency: Reply to Oakley. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 76 (3):464 – 472.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. J. L. Marsh (1992). The Gentle and Rigorous Cogency of Communicative Rationality. In James L. Marsh, John D. Caputo & Merold Westphal (eds.), Modernity and its Discontents. Fordham University Press 197--215.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  15.  2
    Mark Vorobej (2008). Cogency, Compactness and Microstructure. Informal Logic 28 (3):279-281.
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  4
    John King-Farlow (1968). Cogency, Conviction, and Coercion. International Philosophical Quarterly 8 (3):464-473.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. E. Harris (1993). Eloquence, Cogency Or Sleight Of Hand: A Reply To Klempner. Bulletin of the Hegel Society of Great Britain 27:98-102.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18. Bellarmine Nneji (2010). Eco-Responsibility: The Cogency for Environmental Ethics in Africa. Essays in Philosophy 11 (1):5.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. Mark Vorobej, Thick Cogency.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20.  37
    George Boger (2005). Subordinating Truth–Is Acceptability Acceptable? Argumentation 19 (2):187-238.
    Argumentation logicians have recognized a specter of relativism to haunt their philosophy of argument. However, their attempts to dispel pernicious relativism by invoking notions of a universal audience or a community of model interlocutors have not been entirely successful. In fact, their various discussions of a universal audience invoke the context-eschewing formalism of Kant’s categorical imperative. Moreover, they embrace the Kantian method for resolving the antinomies that continually vacillates between opposing extremes – here between a transcendent universal audience and a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  21.  11
    David Godden & Douglas Walton (2007). Advances in the Theory of Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions. Informal Logic 27 (3):267-292.
    This paper begins a working through of Blair’s (2001) theoretical agenda concerning argumentation schemes and their attendant critical questions, in which we propose a number of solutions to some outstanding theoretical issues. We consider the classification of schemes, their ultimate nature, their role in argument reconstruction, their foundation as normative categories of argument, and the evaluative role of critical questions.We demonstrate the role of schemes in argument reconstruction, and defend a normative account of their nature against specific criticisms due to (...)
    Direct download (14 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  22. David Christensen (2004). Putting Logic in its Place: Formal Constraints on Rational Belief. Oxford University Press Uk.
    What role, if any, does formal logic play in characterizing epistemically rational belief? Traditionally, belief is seen in a binary way - either one believes a proposition, or one doesn't. Given this picture, it is attractive to impose certain deductive constraints on rational belief: that one's beliefs be logically consistent, and that one believe the logical consequences of one's beliefs. A less popular picture sees belief as a graded phenomenon. This picture invites the use of probabilistic coherence to constrain rational (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  23. David Godden (2005). Deductivism as an Interpretative Strategy: A Reply to Groarke's Defense of Reconstructive Deductivism. Argumentation and Advocacy: Journal of the American Forensic Association 41:168-183.
    Deductivism has been variously presented as an evaluative thesis and as an interpretive one. I argue that deductivism fails as a universal evaluative thesis, and as such that its value as an interpretive thesis must be supported on other grounds. As a reconstructive strategy, deductivism is justified only on the grounds that an arguer is, or ought to be, aiming at the deductive standard of evidence. As such, the reconstruction of an argument as deductive must be supported by contextual and (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24. Gladys L. Symons (2009). Choreographing Identities and Emotions in Organizations: Doing “Huminality” on a Geriatric Ward. Society and Animals 17 (2):115-135.
    This paper addresses the coconstruction of identities and emotions through the human/animal relationship, arguing that nonhuman animals can and do act as coagents in interspecies encounters. The paper narrates the extraordinary boundary-transgressing experiences of a particular kind of cogency labeled “huminality” . An autoethnographic account of pet-visitation involving a woman, a West Highland white terrier named Fergus, and geriatric residents demonstrates the power of huminality to authorize the emergence and realization of different identities and selves. Examples include the intimate (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Mark Colyvan & Edward N. Zalta (1999). Mathematics: Truth and Fiction? Review of Mark Balaguer's Platonism and Anti-Platonism in Mathematics. Philosophia Mathematica 7 (3):336-349.
    Mark Balaguer’s project in this book is extremely ambitious; he sets out to defend both platonism and fictionalism about mathematical entities. Moreover, Balaguer argues that at the end of the day, platonism and fictionalism are on an equal footing. Not content to leave the matter there, however, he advances the anti-metaphysical conclusion that there is no fact of the matter about the existence of mathematical objects.1 Despite the ambitious nature of this project, for the most part Balaguer does not shortchange (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  26. Joshua Shepherd (2015). Conscious Control Over Action. Mind and Language 30 (3):320-344.
    The extensive involvement of nonconscious processes in human behaviour has led some to suggest that consciousness is much less important for the control of action than we might think. In this article I push against this trend, developing an understanding of conscious control that is sensitive to our best models of overt action control. Further, I assess the cogency of various zombie challenges—challenges that seek to demote the importance of conscious control for human agency. I argue that though nonconscious (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  27.  80
    Justin Clarke-Doane (forthcoming). Debunking Arguments: Mathematics, Logic, and Modal Security. In Robert Richards and Michael Ruse (ed.), Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Ethics. Cambridge University Press
    I discuss the structure of genealogical debunking arguments. I argue that they undermine our mathematical beliefs if they undermine our moral beliefs. The contrary appearance stems from a confusion of arithmetic truths with (first-order) logical truths, or from a confusion of reliability with justification. I conclude with a discussion of the cogency of debunking arguments, in light of the above. Their cogency depends on whether information can undermine all of our beliefs of a kind, F, without giving us (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28.  16
    Justin A. Capes (forthcoming). Freedom with Causation. Erkenntnis:1-12.
    Our actions have causes, some of which are beyond our control. Of that there can be no serious doubt. Some worry that this fact undermines the commonsense view that we perform free actions for which we are morally responsible. My aim in this article is to show that such worries are unfounded and, consequently, that pure non-causal theories of free action, according to which free actions must be entirely uncaused, are false. My argument for this conclusion doesn’t presuppose the (...) of existing objections to non-causal theories of free agency. (shrink)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29.  15
    Lawrence Lengbeyer, Defending Limited Non-Deference to Science Experts.
    Scientists and their supporters often portray as exasperatingly irrational all those laypersons who refuse to accede to practical recommendations issued by expert scientists and 'science appliers'. After first considering the latter groups’ standard explanations for such non-deference, which focus upon irrationalities besetting the laity, I will propose that a better explanation for at least some of the non-deference is that many laypersons are rationally electing to substitute their own judgments for those urged upon them by the scientific community. Science-based recommendations, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. Donald P. Smith (2003). Kant on the Dependency of the Cosmological Argument on the Ontological Argument. European Journal of Philosophy 11 (2):206–218.
    Immanuel Kant’s well known and thoroughly discussed criticism of the cosmological argument, hereafter ‘CA’, is that it presupposes or depends upon the cogency of the ontological argument, hereafter ‘OA’. Call this criticism ‘the Dependency Thesis’. It is fair to say that the received view on the matter is that Kant failed to establish the Dependency Thesis.1 In what follows, I argue that the received view is mistaken. I begin by rehearsing the standard objection to what is typically taken to (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Maria Alvarez (2009). Actions, Thought-Experiments and the 'Principle of Alternate Possibilities'. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (1):61 – 81.
    In 1969 Harry Frankfurt published his hugely influential paper 'Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility' in which he claimed to present a counterexample to the so-called 'Principle of Alternate Possibilities' ('a person is morally responsible for what he has done only if he could have done otherwise'). The success of Frankfurt-style cases as counterexamples to the Principle has been much debated since. I present an objection to these cases that, in questioning their conceptual cogency, undercuts many of those debates. Such (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  32. Thomas Mulligan (1986). A Critique of Milton Friedman's Essay 'the Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits'. Journal of Business Ethics 5 (4):265 - 269.
    The main arguments of Milton Friedman's famous and influential essay are unsuccessful: He fails to prove that the exercise of social responsibility in business is by nature an unfair and socialist practice.Much of Friedman's case is based on a questionable paradigm; a key premise is false; and logical cogency is sometimes missing.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  33. David Godden & William H. Brenner (2010). Wittgenstein and the Logic of Deep Disagreement. Cogency: Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation 2:41-80.
    In “The logic of deep disagreements” (Informal Logic, 1985), Robert Fogelin claimed that there is a kind of disagreement – deep disagreement – which is, by its very nature, impervious to rational resolution. He further claimed that these two views are attributable to Wittgenstein. Following an exposition and discussion of that claim, we review and draw some lessons from existing responses in the literature to Fogelin’s claims. In the final two sections (6 and 7) we explore the role reason can, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Alexandre Billon (2015). Why Are We Certain That We Exist? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 91 (3):723-759.
    Descartes was certain that he was thinking and he was accordingly certain that he existed. Like Descartes, we seem to be more certain of our thoughts and our existence than of anything else. What is less clear is the reason why we are thus certain. Philosophers throughout history have provided different interpretations of the cogito, disagreeing both on the kind of thoughts it characterizes and on the reasons for its cogency. According to what we may call the empiricist interpretation (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  35.  80
    David DeGrazia (2014). Handguns, Moral Rights, and Physical Security. Journal of Moral Philosophy 11 (1):56-76.
    Guns occupy a major—sometimes terrible—place in contemporary American life. Do Americans have not only a legal right, but also a moral right, to own handguns? After introducing the topic, this paper examines what a moral right to private handgun ownership would amount to. It then elucidates the logical structure of the strongest argument in favor of such a right, an argument that appeals to physical security, before assessing its cogency and identifying two questionable assumptions. In light of persisting reasonable (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  10
    Bo R. Meinertsen (2016). A Method for Evaluation of Arguments From Analogy. Cogency: Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation 7 (2):109-123.
    It is a common view that arguments from analogy can only be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. However, while this reflects an important insight, I propose instead a relatively simple method for their evaluation based on just (i) their general form and (ii) four core questions. One clear advantage of this proposal is that it does not depend on any substantial (and controversial) view of similarity, unlike influential current alternative methods, such as Walton’s. Following some initial clarification of the notion (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37.  53
    Marko Jurjako (2013). Self-Deception and the Selectivity Problem. Balkan Journal of Philosophy 5 (2):151-162.
    In this article I discuss and evaluate the selectivity problem as a problem put forward by Bermúdez (1997, 2000) against anti-intentionalist accounts of self-deception. I argue that the selectivity problem can be raised even against intentionalist accounts, which reveals the too demanding constraint that the problem puts on the adequacy of a psychological explanation of action. Finally I try to accommodate the intuitions that support the cogency of the selectivity problem using the resources from the framework provided by an (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38.  38
    Annalisa Coliva (ed.) (2012). Mind, Meaning, and Knowledge: Themes From the Philosophy of Crispin Wright. Oxford University Press.
    This volume is a collective exploration of major themes in the work of Crispin Wright, one of today's leading philosophers. These newly commissioned papers are divided into four sections, preceded by a substantial Introduction, which places them in the context of the development of Wright's ideas. The distinguished contributors address issues such as the rule-following problem, knowledge of our meanings and minds, truth, realism, anti-realism and relativism, as well as the nature of perceptual justification, the cogency of arguments such (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  39. Alan Strudler (2008). Confucian Skepticism About Workplace Rights. Business Ethics Quarterly 18 (1):67-83.
    Confucian scholars express skepticism about rights. This skepticism is relevant to managers who face issues about the recognition of workplace rights in a Confucian culture. My essay examines the foundations of this skepticism, and the cogency of potential leading Western liberal responses to it. I conclude that Confucian skepticism is more formidable than liberals have recognized. I attempt to craft an argument that defuses Confucian skepticism about workplace rights while at the same time respecting the moral depth of Confucianism.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  40. Glen Hoffmann (2011). Two Kinds of A Priori Infallibility. Synthese 181 (2):241-253.
    On rationalist infallibilism, a wide range of both (i) analytic and (ii) synthetic a priori propositions can be infallibly justified (or absolutely warranted), i.e., justified to a degree that entails their truth and precludes their falsity. Though rationalist infallibilism is indisputably running its course, adherence to at least one of the two species of infallible a priori justification refuses to disappear from mainstream epistemology. Among others, Putnam (1978) still professes the a priori infallibility of some category (i) propositions, while Burge (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  41.  62
    Steven W. Patterson (2015). The Methodological Usefulness of Deep Disagreement. Cogency: Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation 6 (2).
    In this paper I begin by examining Fogelin’s account of deep disagreement. My contention is that this account is so deeply flawed as to cast doubt on the possibility that such deep disagreements actually happen. Nevertheless, I contend that the notion of deep disagreement itself is a useful theoretical foil for thinking about argumentation. The second part of this paper makes this case by showing how thinking about deep disagreements from the perspective of rhetoric, Walton-style argumentation theory, computation, and normative (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42. Jim Hopkins (1995). Wittgenstein, Interpretation, and the Foundations of Psychoanalysis. New Formations.
    In his work on following a rule Wittgenstein discerned principles of interpretation that apply to commonsense psychology and psychoanalysis. We can use these to assess the cogency of psychoanalytic reasoning.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  36
    Robert Stern (2012). Understanding Moral Obligation: Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard. Cambridge University Press.
    In many histories of modern ethics, Kant is supposed to have ushered in an anti-realist or constructivist turn by holding that unless we ourselves 'author' or lay down moral norms and values for ourselves, our autonomy as agents will be threatened. In this book, Robert Stern challenges the cogency of this 'argument from autonomy', and claims that Kant never subscribed to it. Rather, it is not value realism but the apparent obligatoriness of morality that really poses a challenge to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  44.  11
    Zach Weber (2016). Intrinsic Value and the Last Last Man. Ratio 29 (3):n/a-n/a.
    Even if you were the last person on Earth, you should not cut down all the trees—or so goes the Last Man thought experiment, which has been taken to show that nature has intrinsic value. But ‘Last Man’ is caught on a dilemma. If Last Man is too far inside the anthropocentric circle, so to speak, his actions cannot be indicative of intrinsic value. If Last Man is cast too far outside the anthropocentric circle, though, then value terms lose their (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. Cathal O'Madagain (2014). Can Groups Have Concepts? Semantics for Collective Intentions. Philosophical Issues 24 (1):347-363.
    A substantial literature supports the attribution of intentional states such as beliefs and desires to groups. But within this literature, there is no substantial account of group concepts. Since on many views, one cannot have an intentional state without having concepts, such a gap undermines the cogency of accounts of group intentionality. In this paper I aim to provide an account of group concepts. First I argue that to fix the semantics of the sentences groups use to make their (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46.  3
    Fabio Paglieri (2015). Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory. Informal Logic 35 (1):65-87.
    Virtue argumentation theory has been charged of being incomplete, given its alleged inability to account for argument cogency in virtue-theoretical terms. Instead of defending VAT against that challenge, I suggest it is misplaced, since it is based on a premise VAT does not endorse, and raises an issue that most versions of VAT need not consider problematic. This in turn allows distinguishing several varieties of VAT, and clarifying what really matters for them.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  47. William P. Alston (1983). What's Wrong with Immediate Knowledge? Synthese 55 (April):73-96.
    Immediate knowledge is here construed as true belief that does not owe its status as knowledge to support by other knowledge (or justified belief) of the same subject. The bulk of the paper is devoted to a criticism of attempts to show the impossibility of immediate knowledge. I concentrate on attempts by Wilfrid Sellars and Laurence Bonjour to show that putative immediate knowledge really depends on higher-level knowledge or justified belief about the status of the beliefs involved in the putative (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  48.  84
    Craig Roxborough & Jill Cumby (2009). Folk Psychological Concepts: Causation. Philosophical Psychology 22 (2):205-213.
    Which factors influence the folk application of the concept of causation? Knobe has argued that causal judgments are primarily influenced by the moral valence of the behavior under consideration. Whereas Driver has pointed out that the data Knobe relies on can also be used to support the claim that it is the atypicality of the agent's behavior that influences our willingness to assign causality to that agent. While Knobe and Fraser have provided a further study to address the cogency (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  49.  58
    Steven W. Patterson (2011). A Picture Held Us Captive: The Later Wittgenstein and Visual Argumentation. Cogency: Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation 2 (2):105-134.
    The issue of whether or not there are visual arguments has been an issue in informal logic and argumentation theory at least since 1996. In recent years, books, sections of prominent conferences and special journals issues have been devoted to it, thus significantly raising the profile of the debate. In this paper I will attempt to show how the views of the later Wittgenstein, particularly his views on images and the no- tion of “picturing”, can be brought to bear on (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  50.  21
    Anjan Chakravartty (forthcoming). Particles, Causation, and the Metaphysics of Structure. Synthese:1-17.
    I consider the idea of a structure of fundamental physical particles being causal. Causation is traditionally thought of as involving relations between entities—objects or events—that cause and are affected. On structuralist interpretations, however, it is unclear whether or how precisely fundamental particles can be causally efficacious. On some interpretations, only relations exist; on others, particles are ontologically dependent on their relations in ways that problematize the traditional picture. I argue that thinking about causal efficacy in this context generates an inevitable (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 211