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will not be published.

 
V 39
Aim/Purpose/Machine/Rorty: the purpose of a machine is not inherent in it. - A machine can be used for many different purposes. - Machines do not have a center. - Those with fewer parts are not perfect machines.
Purpose/Machine: a machine can be used for many different purposes. The purpose of the machine is not inherent in it.
- - -
Aim/Purpose/Human/MacIntyre/Rorty: it is difficult to see where the purpose of the human could be. We cannot maintain the "functional" Aristotelian concept that establishes a relationship between "human" and "live well" along the lines of "harpist" and "good at playing the harp." (Collingwood as well).
>MacIntyre, >Collingwood.
V 39
Newton/Universe/Rorty: Newton sees the universe as a mechanism. Consequence: a purpose is no longer inherent in the world itself! The world no longer teaches people how they should live.
Darwin/Purpose: interaction between species coincidental. Therefore also here: the purpose is not inherent in the event itself.
- - -
VI 434f
Aim/Purpose/Darwinism/Rorty: Darwin banned purpose from nature, as far as it reaches beyond the needs of a specific organism.
Aim/Purpose/RortyVsDewey: but as soon as purpose disappears from nature, there is no philosophical problem anymore that would affect the ability of science (of knowledge)! For then, the reconciliation of the purposes of the subject with those of the object is no longer a problem. The object is no longer the embodiment of a telos (of nature, Aristotle), but simply an object of handling.
>Nature/Aristotle, >Teleology, >Actions, >Epistemology, >Darwinism, >NatureNature, >Nature/Dewey.

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.