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will not be published.

 
Rorty I 202
Science/Sellars: science is not rational because it has a foundation - but because it is a self-correcting enterprise, in which each of its sentences can be questioned, though not all at the same time.
Cf. >Foundation.
---
Sellars I 71
Science/everyday language/Sellars: Thesis: the scientific discourse is only a continuation of the everyday language.
>Everyday language, >Psychological Nominalism.
---
Putnam III 131
Science/Sellars: semantic relations to things should not matter in the ideal science (Williams ditto).
Normal Language/Sellars: maps the world more or less appropriate, but has no objective semantic relation to the world.
>Mapping/Sellars, >World/thinking.
PutnamVs: Sellars does not explain how ideal science would be possible.

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.