Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Dependence: Question whether statements, phenomena, beliefs, attitudes, actions are influenced causally or otherwise by other statements, beliefs, events, actions etc. and whether this influence is indispensable for their realization. See also counterfactuals, absoluteness.
 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data
Lewis, David
 
Books on Amazon
Dependence V 166
Nomic dependence/Lewis: two families of law propositions or individual fact p imply together all material conditionals between the two families. - Then the material conditionals are implied by the counterfactual conditionals which include the counterfactual dependence (conD). - The nomic dependence explains the counterfactual dependence. - Important argument: the law propositions and the fact propositions must be counterfactually independent - nomic dependence: reversible. - counterfactual dependence is irreversible - E.g. Barometer/pressure.
---
V 312f
Dependence hypothesis/Lewis: here: set of propositions (sets of possible worlds) which specify everything the (omniscient) actor knows about causal dependence and independence of his actions - they form a partition. - I.e. they do not overlap. - Expected benefits: Do not refer to individual dependency hypotheses. - ((s) i.e. it must not be assumed to be without alternative.) - You have to spread your beliefs on several dependencies.) - Benefit: to be understood as a non-conditional belief of a variation K of an alternative dependence hypothesis. - When options and dependency hypotheses differ, the difference shows the aspect which brings the novelty. - Wrong: wanting to maximize the expected benefits to any partition - This would lead to different answers for different partitions - the partition for propositions of the value level would tell us fatalistically that all options are equally good.
---
V 320
Dependence hypothesis/illustration/probability distribution/Lewis: If the same dependence applies in several worlds, the images represent the worlds in the same way. - If the images are the same, we have equivalence classes. - Then we have the partition of these equivalence classes.

LW I
D. Lewis
Die Identität von Körper und Geist Frankfurt 1989

LW II
D. Lewis
Konventionen Berlin 1975

LW IV
D. Lewis
Philosophical Papers Bd I New York Oxford 1983

LW V
D. Lewis
Philosophical Papers Bd II New York Oxford 1986

LwCl I
Cl. I. Lewis
Mind and the World Order: Outline of a Theory of Knowledge (Dover Books on Western Philosophy) 1991


> Counter arguments against Lewis



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX file
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-04-27