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will not be published.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 113
Cogito/Descartes/Hintikka: the cogito is not a premise whose conclusion would be the sum.
Solution/Hintikka: it is an act of thinking that proves the existence of the subject itself.
Analogously: a speech act also proves the existence of itself to the subject. Mark Twain says: "I exist".
HintikkaVsDescartes: Problem: 1. What kind of entity is this, which should prove "res" with it?
2. To answer the question, what has been proved at all, we need to clarify the status of the entity.
E.g. Italo Calvino: Charlemagne asks a knight why he has closed the visor. He answers: "Sir, I do not exist".
II 114
Existence/non-existence/subsistence/Hintikka: in this example, the knight does not exist in a certain way, but in another, namely, in which he can be the hero of history.
N.B.: i.e. here the speech act is not a conclusive proof of its existence ((s) within fiction).
>Non-existence, >Fiction, >Proof.
Cogito/Descartes/Hintikka: it would have been wrong, too, had Descartes concluded:
"Cogito, ergo Descartes exists". ((a) So for the "I", which is explicit in "sum", insert the name).
Analog: e.g. if someone tells me in the street: "Mark Twain exists" that would be just as little evidence for the existence of Mark Twain. It would have to be him who performs the speech act.
Cogito/knowledge/Hintikka: problem: Descartes must also know additionally that the questionable thinker is this entity, or that type of entity.
Existence/identity/entity/identification/Quine/Hintikka: Quine: "No entity without identity": that is, Descartes needs to know something about himself to be able to say about himself that he exists.
Solution/Hintikka: we must distinguish two types of cross-world identification (cross-identification):
a) perspective (subject-centric) identification: this is not subjective, even if it is relative to a person
II 115
(It only uses one coordinate system defined by reference to the user. It itself depends on objective general principles.)
b) public (object-centered) identification.
>Cross-world-identifiacation, >Identification.

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.