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will not be published.

 
II 121
Inegalitarian Theory/Nozick: an inegalitarian theory assumes that a state is privileged as a "natural". This needs no explanation and also does not allow one. - Other situations are then differences that need to be explained.
E.g. For Newton rest or uniformity of movement was the natural state.
For Aristotle: rest. - inegalitarian theory does not answer,
1. Why this state is the natural.
2. Why exactly these forces are making a difference.
To accept something as a natural state is also to ascribe a specific content to him.
II 122
R. Harris: the thesis that something remains the same, does not need to be explained.
>Regularity, >Explanations, >Constancy.
NozickVs: but we have to explain why a thing for the purposes of this principle counts as the same and not in other contexts.
Existence: the question concerning it, is typical inegalitary.
Punchline: here we presuppose the nothing as their natural state.
Cf. >Existence/Leibniz.
II 126
1. We do not know what the natural state is.
2. We do not know whether there is a fundamental natural state at all. That means whether the correct fundamental theory is inegalitary.
Each inegalitarian theory leaves a bare fact as inexplicable back, a "natural state".
II 127
Egalitarian Theory/Nozick: needs to see much more possible states as in need of explanation. - But it asks no longer the question "Why X instead of Y?" - But always "Why X?".
II 127
Egalitarian Theory/existence/nothing/Nozick: "principle of indifference" (from probability theory). - For them, there are many ways, how things could be, but only one possibility how nothing exists. - Punchline: then is the chance that something exists much greater than that nothing exists.
Vs: one has to make an appropriate division into states that are to be treated as equally likely. - Many ways how things exists can be summarized as one.
Extreme case: only two ways: something exists or does not exist.
II 128
Under the worst assumption if we assume a division, there is a 50%-chance that something exists. - Because all other divisions have to be at least three partitions then, the chance that something exists rises for the next alternative already to two-thirds. - At the end almost 1. - Problem: the probability theory is still assuming the non-existence as the natural state - because it assumes that if something exists, then randomly - The natural state of a way is the non-realization.
Solution:> richness.

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.