Lexicon of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
I 4
Realism/FraassenVsRealism: inverted error as in positivism: instead of making everything into language, it realizes everything that cannot be defined away. >Positivism.
I 7
((s) VsRealism/Fraassen/(s): realism cannot claim that the present best theory is false, i.e. it is ultimately denying progress.)
I 9
However, the orientation to truth does not imply that we are ever entitled to believe a theory.
I 21
Realism/Best Explanation/Fraassen: every regularity needs an explanation.
Nominalism: there are only regularities, but they do not all have to be explained. >Nominalism.
I 24
Regularities are "mere facts" (or: "naked facts").
I 32f
Sellars: pro Realism - Theory/Sellars: explains not at all, but shows why observable objects obey so-called laws - there are no empirical laws - For example that water boils at 100°C is valid only under normal pressure. - (> Laws/Nancy Cartwright, Theories/Cartwright, Explanations/Cartwright).
I 37
Realism/Dummett: new: realism should not relate classes of entities and expressions, but classes of statements - these can only be understood by reference to the kind thing we would accept as evidence - thus the nominalist becomes a realist.
I 38
Realism/Dummett/Fraassen: this is where Dummett is concerned with language. - According to him, not all sentences must be true/false - but they can be!
Constructive Empiricism: also the constructive empiricism adopts mind-independent truth values.
FraassenVsDummett: this is not about language. >Empiricism.
I 209
Realism/Fraassen pro: we know of some regularities - so there must be underlying reasons - according to Thomas Aquina's proof of God's existence.
>Proof of God's existence.

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.