Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.
The author or concept searched is found in the following 9 entries.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anthropic Principle | Gould | IV 314 Anthropic Principle/Gould: (physicist Freeman Dyson took this term from an opponent): Dyson: "I don't feel like a stranger in this universe; I find more and more evidence that the universe somehow must have known we were coming".(1) Only evidence: there are some laws of nature that would have prevented life if the initial conditions had been a little different. Example Dyson: "Suppose the distances of the galaxies were 10 times smaller (than an average of 32 trillion km), then it would be very likely that in the 3.5 billion years at least one celestial body would have come so close that it would have directed the Earth out of orbit around the Sun and destroyed all life."(2) Dyson: "The special harmony between the structure of the universe and the needs of life and intelligence is a manifestation of the meaning of the mind in the scheme of things".(3) IV 315 GouldVsAnthropic principle: that is an argument that has already been moth-eaten. Central error: results from the nature of history: every complex historical event represents a summation of improbabilities and thus becomes absolutely improbable itself. But something must always happen, even if a certain "something" amazes us by its improbability. We could look at any event and say, "Isn't that amazing?" For example, let us assume that the universe consists of little more than diprotons. Would that be bad? Would we have to conclude that some God looked or loved like coupled hydrogen nuclei, or that no God or Spirit existed at all? But if there is a God, why does he have to prefer a cosmos that creates a life like ours? Why should diprotons not be witnesses of a pre-existent intelligence, even if no chronicler could be found? Does all intelligence have to have an uncontrollable urge to embody itself in a universe of its choice? 1. F. Dyson,. (1979). Disturbing the universe. New York: Harper and Row. 2. F. Dyson, ibid. 3. F. Dyson, ibid. |
Gould I Stephen Jay Gould The Panda’s Thumb. More Reflections in Natural History, New York 1980 German Edition: Der Daumen des Panda Frankfurt 2009 Gould II Stephen Jay Gould Hen’s Teeth and Horse’s Toes. Further Reflections in Natural History, New York 1983 German Edition: Wie das Zebra zu seinen Streifen kommt Frankfurt 1991 Gould III Stephen Jay Gould Full House. The Spread of Excellence from Plato to Darwin, New York 1996 German Edition: Illusion Fortschritt Frankfurt 2004 Gould IV Stephen Jay Gould The Flamingo’s Smile. Reflections in Natural History, New York 1985 German Edition: Das Lächeln des Flamingos Basel 1989 |
| Culture | Flusser | Rötzer I 70 Cultural Revolution/Flusser: is the reluctance to not want to recognise all these images and sounds as art, since they do not correspond to the modern art concept. Rock music, for example, has a great influence on our behaviour, such as car gears. Rötzer I 71 Culture/Flusser: if the selection of sounds is determined by chance, one speaks of nature, it is determined by humans, one speaks of culture. This selection and design can now be left to machines. According to Husserl, qualities can no longer be abstracted from quantities. >E. Husserl. --- Flusser I 66 Mass culture/Flusser: not perceived as a blurring of articulation, but as a more beautiful and colourful world. (Coca-Cola) 'better designed'. >Mass culture. For example, Brazilian coffee pickers eat pizza without protest, which is actually intended for Neapolitan fishermen and e.g. Parisian bank officials wear Texan cowboy hats. cf. >Civilization. I 67 - I 70 Existentially, no one benefits from the massification because all people are massified, i.e. no one stands above it. (>Warhol: the Queen doesn't get a better Coke.). Public opinion can only demand a new soap or a war if the product is already ready. I 153 Culture/Flusser: The relationship between masses and elite culture is often misrepresented: it is not about whether a philosopher should publish in "Playboy", but about whether the sketch above can be influenced from the left, i.e. from history! I 154 Flusser: it is the question of whether Buddhist monks burning themselves in front of the camera have not recognized themselves better than "committed philosophers", what this is currently about. Turning the texts around at a critical moment means that they become opaque for the world and transparent for the person who codifies them. >Code/Flusser, >Pictures/Flusser, >Photography/Flusser. Behind the texts you do not see the world, but the person who wrote them. At this moment, the danger of falling into the abyss of the madness of the senseless, inaccessible world is arising (Wittgenstein, Kafka) >Texts, >Literature. 1. One can fall silent. I 155 2. One can try to regain the magical consciousness (Nazism). 3. One can try to give the texts a new meaning. 1. and 2. are useless, because it is impossible to undo alienation. Third possibility: no longer try to understand one-dimensional processual, linear, but structural, multi-dimensional, figurative. Not historically, but to think phenomenally about processes, cybernetically. >Understanding. I 156 The world hides the texts from us in such a way that it does not allow us to see their insignificance. It makes us second-degree illiterate. >World, >Reality, >World/Thinking. I 205 Supermarket: The supermarket is a rat trap, you have to stand in line and pay a sacrifice for the release from captivity at the cash desk. The supermarket is the opposite of the real market: it does not allow the exchange of information, it is not a public space but a prison (private in the strictest sense of the word). I 249 Culture/Flusser: The improbability of the Concorde ((s) A supersonic passenger plane operated between 1976 and 2003) is different from that of the hen, and this is a fact that we disguise. |
Fl I V. Flusser Kommunikologie Mannheim 1996 Rötz I F. Rötzer Kunst machen? München 1991 |
| Information | Information, information theory: A character or a character combination contains information when it is clear to the recipient that this character or the character combination appears instead of another possible character or a possible character combination. The supply of possible characters determines to a part the probability of the occurrence of a character from this supply. In addition, the expected probability of the appearance of a character can be increased by already experienced experiences of regularities. The amount of information transmitted by a character depends on the improbability of the occurrence of the character. |
||
| Life | Gould | I 227 ff Beginning/life/Gould: e.g. at the end of 1977, fossil prokaryotes were discovered in South Africa, which were about 3.4 billion years old. This is a much earlier beginning of life than previously assumed. Definition prokaryotes: prokaryotes are e.g. bacteria and blue-green algae, among others and they form the kingdom of the Definition Monera: Monera have no organelles, no nuclei, no mitochondria. A short time later it was announced that these methane bacteria are not closely related to other Monera at all. Common ancestors had to be much older! The oldest dated rocks in West Greenland are 3.8 billion years old. So there is very little time from the creation of decent living conditions to the creation of life itself. Perhaps the emergence of life (primitive life) is as inevitable as that of feldspar or quartz. If methanogens are listed separately, they form a sixth kingdom. Biologists today distinguish between Eukaryotes and prokaryotes rather than between plants and animals. Because of a common RNA sequence, the prokaryotes must have had a common precursor at some point in time. I 234 The assumption of a steady evolutionary speed is probably impossible to maintain. The early methanogens may have developed much faster. I 260 Form/life/organism/evolution/physics/Gould: stability is created by the fact that a living being is large enough to penetrate into an area where gravity surpasses the forces that take place on the surface. As the ratio of surface to volume decreases with growth, an increasing size is the safest way into this area. The Earth's physical environment contains numerous habitats, which are only available to organisms that are larger than single-celled organisms. The multicellularity probably originated in several places independently of each other. It has the two main features of analogue similarity: 1. it is relatively easy to reach and both highly adaptable and flexible and 2. it is the only possible route to the benefits it brings. With the exception of ostrich eggs, individual cells cannot grow very large. I 261 The multicellularity has probably arisen even within the individual kingdoms several times. Most biologists believe that it occurs in plants and fungi through amalgamation. These organisms are the descendants of protist colonies. (Protists: protists are unicellular organisms, see Terminology/Gould) For example, some Volvox colonies with a fixed number of cells are regularly arranged. The cells may differ in size and the reproductive function may be limited to those of them located at a pole. I 264 Larger animals have such a low ratio of outer surface to volume that they need to form internal organs to increase the available surface area. I 288 Ratio of surface to volume: the ratio of surface to volume is very high in small organisms. Heat is generated by the volume of the body and radiated at its surface. Therefore warm-blooded animals have a particularly high energy requirement. Field mice must eat all the time. The ratio was so low for the large dinosaurs that they could get by without an insulation layer. I 311 Shape/life/physics/size/Gould: the character of Morgan in E. L. Doctorow's "Ragtime" was wrong when he thought that large mammals were geometric copies of their smaller relatives. Elephants have relatively larger brains and thicker legs than mice. He is right in that larger animals are often similar to smaller relatives in the same group. Galileo already gave a classic example: the strength of a leg is a function of the cross-section. The weight that the legs have to carry varies with their volume. In order for the bodily functions to remain the same, animals must change their form when they become larger: "scaling theory". E. g. from crab spider to tarantula, the scale of relatives reaches up to a thousand times the body weight of the smallest specimen. Here too, the scale runs regularly: the duration of the heartbeat increases only 4/10 times as fast as the body weight. I 312 Small animals move through life much faster than large ones, their heart beats faster, they breathe more frequently, their pulse is faster, their "fire of life "burns" faster: in mammals, the metabolic rate increases by only three quarters as fast as the body weight. Smaller ones tend to live shorter than large ones. I 313 However, the homo sapiens lives much longer than a comparable mammal of the same size: See Neoteny/Gould. The importance of the astronomical time is by no means to be denied; animals must measure it in order to survive. I 315 Breathing time and heartbeat increase about 0.28 times faster than body weight; the body weight can be reduced, leaving mammals of any size to breathe once at about 4 beats. For all mammals, regardless of their size, they also breathe about 200 million times during their lifetime, the heart beats about 800 million times. I 318 ff There are magnetotactic bacteria that orient themselves according to the fields and move accordingly. They thus resist the mechanism of Brownian movement. It was discovered that the magnets are distributed in the body of the bacteria in the form of about 20 small particles. Question: why is there this distribution of magnetism on particles, and why are these particles about 500 Angstrom large (1 Angstrom = 1 ten millionth of a millimetre). They form a chain in the body of the elongated bacteria. I 320 If these particles were a little smaller (about one-fifth smaller) then they would be "superparamagnetic", i. e. a magnetic reorientation of the particles could be effected at room temperature. If, on the other hand, they were twice as large, for example, the particles would form their own magnetic range within the particles, pointing in different directions. What can such a small creature do with a magnetic field? The room for movement during the few minutes of their existence is probably only a few centimetres. It does not really matter which way it goes. It can now be decisive for a bacterium to move downwards. Now gravity can be felt at least as well without a magnetic field. However, this only applies to large organisms. I 322 Insects and birds live in a world dominated by forces that affect the surface. Some of them can run on water or hang down from the ceiling because the surface tension is so strong and the gravitation is relatively weak. Gravity is hardly a problem for insects and for bacteria not at all. II 325 Life/sense/Gould: thesis: the history of life has some weak empirical tendencies, but in essence it is nowhere to be found. IV 196 Life/multicellular organisms: life only existed for 600 million years. This time is divided into three major parts: Palaeozoic (old earth age), Mesozoic (earth middle age) and Cenozoic (modern earth age). All problematic cases take place in the Palaeozoic. Surprisingly, there is a superordinate pattern: although the number of problematica (organisms that had no future in evolution and therefore, due to their rarity and isolation are difficult to allocate) is declining towards the modern age, it is amazing how they almost completely disappear towards the end of the Palaeozoic. In the early history of multicellular organisms, the problematica must have flourished. IV 303 Life/Gould: life as a result of structural and functional complexity cannot be broken down into its chemical components and cannot be explained in its entirety by laws. Function: e.g. the cell membrane controls many processes in the cell. How can we interpret the functions of cells by breaking them down into molecular components? III 207 Life/development/complexity: Gould: 7 arguments 1. Life must begin on the left wall (minimum complexity). 2. There must be temporal stability of the original bacterial form. The prokaryotes (organisms without nucleus, chromosomes, mitochondria and choroplasts) consist of breathtakingly diverse groups, which are collectively called "bacteria" and the "blue-green algae", also called bacteria (cyanobacteria), which make use of the photosynthesis. More than half the history of life is the history of prokaryotes. 3. In order for life to spread, a more and more right-wing distribution had to develop. 4. Characterizing a total distribution by an extreme value in a tail is short-sighted. More than 80% of all species are arthropods, and as a rule all members of this tribe are considered primitive. Moreover, the forms that occupied the right tail over time do not form an uninterrupted evolutionary sequence. It is a colorful row that is not connected. Time Sequence: bacteria, eukaryotic cell, marine algae, jellyfish, trilobite, nautilus, shellfish, dinosaurs, sabre-toothed tigers, homo sapiens. 5. Causality lies on the ((s) left) wall (lowest complexity) and in the extension of the range of variations. The right tail is not cause, but effect. III 212 6. The only way to reintroduce progress is logically possible, but empirically most likely wrong. The first living creature stands on the left wall but the first mammal, the first flowering plant or the first clam starts from the middle and the offspring can move in both directions. But there are good reasons to assume a preference for the direction to the left, because parasitism is a very common evolutionary strategy, and parasites are anatomically usually built simpler than their independent ancestors (Vs progress!). So the whole system could contain subordinate counterlines. Empirically, the finds show no preference to the right! 7. Even a narrow-minded limitation to the right tail (>complexity) does not lead to the desired conclusion, namely a predictable, meaningful evolution to the supremacy of a conscious being. The right tail must exist statistically, but what kind of living things exist cannot be predicted at all. It is by no means determined by the mechanisms of evolution! If evolution were to repeat itself, the development to human-like beings would be virtually impossible, because of the extreme improbability. |
Gould I Stephen Jay Gould The Panda’s Thumb. More Reflections in Natural History, New York 1980 German Edition: Der Daumen des Panda Frankfurt 2009 Gould II Stephen Jay Gould Hen’s Teeth and Horse’s Toes. Further Reflections in Natural History, New York 1983 German Edition: Wie das Zebra zu seinen Streifen kommt Frankfurt 1991 Gould III Stephen Jay Gould Full House. The Spread of Excellence from Plato to Darwin, New York 1996 German Edition: Illusion Fortschritt Frankfurt 2004 Gould IV Stephen Jay Gould The Flamingo’s Smile. Reflections in Natural History, New York 1985 German Edition: Das Lächeln des Flamingos Basel 1989 |
| Metaphors | Metaphor: a metaphor is the transmission of a linguistic expression into a different context than that in which it was expected. The expectation results from the frequency of previous uses in certain contexts. Through the transmission an expression, which is actually expected at this place in the speech, is replaced. The condition for replacement is a certain similarity between the characteristics of the old and the new expression required for understanding. The improbability of the appearance of the new expression is a condition for the rhetorical effect of the metaphor. |
||
| Order | Genz | II 262 Order/Genz: when everything has decayed to dust, the remaining order of atoms and molecules is still "infinitely" much larger than the disassembled one. II 263 Definition micro-state/gas/Genz: a micro-state is the state of the entirety of molecules (location and speed of molecules). Different micro-states are compatible with the same macro-state. The larger the volume of a gas, the greater the number of possible micro-states. Order: therefore, a smaller gas volume is always in a more orderly state than a larger one. >Entropy. II 264 Order/temperature/Genz: analogous to this applies here: the higher the temperature, the greater the number of possible speeds of individual molecules. Definition Entropy/measure/disorder: entropy is the number of possible micro-states of a macroscopic object that are compatible with a given macro-state of that object. Problem: 1. the micro-states of quantum mechanical objects are quite different. 2. for counting the states, discrete values must then be assigned to the continuous variables. Since the number is very large, you do not use them yourself, but the number of digits that would require you to write them down. >Quantum mechanics. II 266ff Probability/micro-state/gas/Genz: it is so unlikely that all molecules will come together once in the left half of the container and leave the right half empty that it will not occur in world ages. This is a physical "never" or "always", not a mathematical one. >Probability. II 268 Explanation/general/Genz: general explanations do not refer to certain bodies. They say that all developments always lead from improbable to probable conditions. >Explanations. Impossibility/physical/Genz: unlike the mathematical impossibility: is the highest improbability. For example, it is impossible to set an initial state that would cause all molecules to assemble on the left side of the box because it is undetectably isolated in a continuum of states that have no such consequence. II 310 Order/realism/idealism/descartes/Leibniz/Spinoza/Genz: thesis: the "identity of ideal and real order of things" is based on a common ground of both. Descartes/Spinoza: this is the work of God as a creator of both the world and the cognitive mind. Leibniz: the pre-stabilized harmony. >G.W. Leibniz, >B. Spinoza. II 326 Order/disorder/entropy/Turing machine/Genz: it is an important question how entropy as a measure can be freed from the arbitrarily chosen size of the assumed fields in a Turing maschine. In fact, it is not only the location of the particles that is required to define entropy, but also the simultaneous indication of location and velocity in a phase space. However, the uncertainty ratio applies to both together. Solution: therefore, entropy can be traced back to the division of phase space into boxes with volumes as small as is compatible with the blur of location and velocity. >Uncertainty principle. |
Gz I H. Genz Gedankenexperimente Weinheim 1999 Gz II Henning Genz Wie die Naturgesetze Wirklichkeit schaffen. Über Physik und Realität München 2002 |
| Possibility | Genz | II 268 Impossibility/physical/Genz: unlike mathematical impossibility: is the highest improbability. For example, it is impossible to set an initial state that would cause all molecules to assemble on the left side of the box because it is undetectably isolated in a continuum of states that have no such consequence. Cf. >Possibility, >Logical possibility, >Metaphysical possibility. |
Gz I H. Genz Gedankenexperimente Weinheim 1999 Gz II Henning Genz Wie die Naturgesetze Wirklichkeit schaffen. Über Physik und Realität München 2002 |
| Probability Law | Armstrong | III 29f Probability Laws/Armstrong: relative frequency does not have to depict the probability law. - Each occurring event itself may be unlikely. Infinite sequences: here you can form the limit of relative frequencies, but that is no solution. Regularity Theory: must assume a law of probability for each event: absurd. >Regularity theory. "Indefinite improbability"/Lewis/Armstrong: the relative frequency wrongly maps the probability law. Distribution: No distribution is impossible, therefore, the law seems to allow any. Real probability law: here there is no property D through which the atom disintegrates when the property is present. III 31 Probability Laws/Armstrong: cannot be identified with molecular facts of distributions. - Probability laws are natural laws that do not logically supervene on facts. |
Armstrong I David M. Armstrong Meaning and Communication, The Philosophical Review 80, 1971, pp. 427-447 In Handlung, Kommunikation, Bedeutung, Georg Meggle Frankfurt/M. 1979 Armstrong II (a) David M. Armstrong Dispositions as Categorical States In Dispositions, Tim Crane London New York 1996 Armstrong II (b) David M. Armstrong Place’ s and Armstrong’ s Views Compared and Contrasted In Dispositions, Tim Crane London New York 1996 Armstrong II (c) David M. Armstrong Reply to Martin In Dispositions, Tim Crane London New York 1996 Armstrong II (d) David M. Armstrong Second Reply to Martin London New York 1996 Armstrong III D. Armstrong What is a Law of Nature? Cambridge 1983 |
| Quantities | Flusser | Rötzer I 72 Quantity/Fluxer: Quantitative methods are methods to generate improbabilities that were previously often impossibilities. A synthesis of both types of theory (quantitative and qualitative) should be possible. >Probability, >Information, >Improbability, >Communication, >Quality, >Synthesis. |
Fl I V. Flusser Kommunikologie Mannheim 1996 Rötz I F. Rötzer Kunst machen? München 1991 |
| |||
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author Vs Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bayesianism | Nozick Vs Bayesianism | II 257 Probability Conclusion/Revised Principle/Nozick: e P(e I h) >= 0,95 P(e I not h) P(e I not h) conclude h. If the initial probability P0 (h) is small, and yet there is e, then something improbable is present, either e is unlikely or h. It only seems reasonable to conclude that h is true if it has the lower improbability, and it is even less likely that not-h, given e. The revised principle sometimes precludes false belief, but cannot play a general, positive role in the acceptance of beliefs. NoczickVsBayes: it is a mistake that very high, but unsupported (uninformed) initial probability leads to high belief probabilities. II 258 Hypotheses/Probability//Nozick: we must also consider the probability of alternative hypotheses: P(e,hi) >= 0,95 P(e I not hi) P(e I not hi). In addition, not-hi must not be precluded by the principle. II 259 This is a Bayesian limitation of our principle, but we still do not operate on the Bayes theorem, because that strongly depends on the choice of initial probability. NozickVsBayes: high initial probability cannot fix belief on its own, in the absence of evidence. |
No I R. Nozick Philosophical Explanations Oxford 1981 No II R., Nozick The Nature of Rationality 1994 |
| Pascal, B. | Mackie Vs Pascal, B. | Stegmüller IV 481 Pascal's Wager/Pascal/Stegmüller: we know that God exists or does not exist. But our theoretical reason can not decide. One can also not just contain judgment, one has to decide. Possible benefit: bliss and knowledge of the truth. What we risk is error and misery. The stakes are reason and will. Whatever choice we make, we will in no case violate reason. IV 482 The situation is different with bliss: one loses nothing in the case of God's non-existence, but also wins nothing. Thus practical reason is in favor of God. Pascal adds: however, one could lose one's earthly happiness (when it lies in debauchery) but the comparison to eternal bliss speaks for the latter. One need not assume that the probabilities of existence or nonexistence are equal! Even if the difference tends to infinity it is worth working for the benefit of existence. ((s) Cf. egalitarian/inegalitarian theories/Nozick). Mackie offers a table of the probability distribution in his book. IV 483 VsPascal: what does it mean to believe anything on such a basis? Maybe someone is simply unable to believe in God? Faith/Stegmüller: you can not willingly believe in something. Pascal: but perhaps the impediment lies somewhere in the mind - which can be influenced. One can decide to practice faith! Indirectly willful. MackieVsPascal: 1. opposition to his own assertion that a bet doesn't violate reason: whoever thereby reaches faith, does violate his reason and discernment. 2. Who decides against infinite improbability, discards indeed their rational principles! IV 484 3. Pascal's additional requirements come into play: the doctrine of predestination could indeed be correct, in the case, everyone should strive to make their earthly life as happy as possible. Additionally, the bet is based on an extremely primitive concept of God: a stupid and vain God. 4. Even if there should be such a God, it would perhaps not be content with belief in him, but would call for a church, etc. |
Macki I J. L. Mackie Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong 1977 Carnap V W. Stegmüller Rudolf Carnap und der Wiener Kreis In Hauptströmungen der Gegenwartsphilosophie Bd I, München 1987 St I W. Stegmüller Hauptströmungen der Gegenwartsphilosophie Bd I Stuttgart 1989 St II W. Stegmüller Hauptströmungen der Gegenwartsphilosophie Bd 2 Stuttgart 1987 St III W. Stegmüller Hauptströmungen der Gegenwartsphilosophie Bd 3 Stuttgart 1987 St IV W. Stegmüller Hauptströmungen der Gegenwartsphilosophie Bd 4 Stuttgart 1989 |
| Popper, K. | Kuhn Vs Popper, K. | Hacking I 400 Messen/KuhnVsPopper: It almost never happens that theories are contradicted by precise measurements. Ex. Cavendish has not tested the theory of gravity but determines the value of G. Experiments are generally rewarded when the approximate numbers which were previously assumed come out. Kuhn I 90 Falsification/KuhnVsPopper: In the history of science, no example of falsification because of a comparison with nature! For those who decided to use Newton's theory, his second law is a purely logical statement that cannot be contradicted by observations. I 157 KuhnVsPopper: Anomalous experiences cannot be compared with falsified ones! I believe that the latter do not exist at all! If every single mismatch would be a reason for rejecting a theory, all theories would always need to be rejected. If, on the other hand, only a serious discorrespondency were to count, Popper's followers would need a "criterion of improbability "or the "degree of falsification". I 158 KuhnVsPopper: Falsification: Is a later and separate process, which could very well be called verification, since it represents the triumph of a new paradigm over an older one. Correspondence theory: For historians at least there is no much sense in the statement that verification is determining the correspondence between facts and theory. All historically significant theories corresponded to those facts, however only up to a certain point!(> Theory/Kuhn). However, it is quite reasonable to ask which of two competing theories fits better with the facts. |
Kuhn I Th. Kuhn The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago 1962 German Edition: Die Struktur wissenschaftlicher Revolutionen Frankfurt 1973 Hacking I I. Hacking Representing and Intervening. Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science, Cambridge/New York/Oakleigh 1983 German Edition: Einführung in die Philosophie der Naturwissenschaften Stuttgart 1996 |
| Theism | Mackie Vs Theism | Stegmüller IV 466 Theodicy/popular version: (i) logical necessity: God cannot create e.g. quadrangular circles. Since evil is logically a part of the good, one cannot exist without the others. Vs: firstly: this is not a conclusion from the premise! further: a) The principle is not compellent. 1. if there were a common property that each and every thing possessed automatically, there would be no need for a predicate for it in any language. 2. It could be that this property would not be noticed by anyone! However, one could not assert: if everything possessed this property, this property didn't exist at all. b) The argument would explain at most the occurrence of very few evils. (As a side effect, not as e.g. planned genocide). IV 467 Theodicy/popular version: (ii) frequently, the argument of "necessary means" is brought forward: The evil as a means for the good. Ex. children must learn from mistakes. StegmüllerVs: However, many children do not learn from the mistakes of the world, but perish from them! Ex. pain as a warning function. Stegmüller: all these truisms are irrelevant to the problem. They are relevant only for limited beings, but God is attributed omnipotence. IV 468 (iii) principle of the organic whole: like an aesthetic principle: evil is part of the "organic whole". Such a world were even better than a purely good world. It were not static, but dynamic. Gradual overcoming of evil by the good. Def. evil of 1st order: suffering, pain, illness Def. values of 1st order: joy, happiness Def. values of 2nd order: moral values, responses to evil of 1st order: compassion, assistance, kindness, heroism. Theism must then support the thesis that evils of 1st order are satisfactorily explained and justified by values of 2nd order. Stegmüller IV 469 Theism/Mackie: Question: can the theist rightly claim that there is only absorbed evil in this world? Only then can he defend his position, otherwise there is unnecessary evils that God in his omnipotence could have avoided. VsTheism: 1. there is much more unabsorbed evils of 1st order (suffering, pain, etc.) as can fit in a valuable whole. 2. the game would be repeated at the next level! The values of 2nd order are accompanied by evils of 2nd order: Ex. wickedness, callousness, gloating, cruelty, cowardice etc. IV 470 Oly possibility: Values of 3rd order: only candidate: free will. It need not be such a value itself, but is logically necessary for realization. IV 471 Theism/Theodicy/R. Gruner: the theist should not only concede the evils, but empasize them as particularly important. The most faithful people have always been those who were most convinced of the reality of evil. Paradox: that faith depends precisely on that fact of which one claims it refuted it. This position is taken in the dialogues of Hume of the Demea. IV 479 Theodicy/free will: in defense of theism the concept of free will could be modified: freedom as a high value, such that God did not know at creation, how people would make use of it. Therefore God is not omniscient. Vs: 1. If God is not omniscient, he is no longer omnipotent, because a limitation of information is a limitation of power. Vs: 2. God would have to be thought of in a timely manner. This renounces an essential element of monotheistic religion. Vs 3. If God did not know what people would do, he still had to know what they could do! IV 481 MackieVsTheism: canot be explained without contradiction, without changing major points. Hume: would say: our boundless ignorance prevents us from claiming to have conclusively refuted theism. IV 516 MackieVsTheism: the competing naturalism always has the better arguments and lower improbability on its side. IV 517 Religion/Theism/R. Robinson: Thesis: the main contradiction between religion and reason is that religion prefers the consolation of truth. God/Spinoza/Stegmüller: (relatively strong modification of the traditional concept of God): no creator God, but infinite. Metaphysical necessity is part of him and thus the universe itself. Theodicy/Spinoza: Thesis: God knows no mercy! It is not a person, even not an infinite one, but a being who does not care about human concerns. IV 518 Religion/theology/Mackie: the monotheistic religions rely on a for them indispensable assumption of existence that is probably wrong. |
Macki I J. L. Mackie Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong 1977 Carnap V W. Stegmüller Rudolf Carnap und der Wiener Kreis In Hauptströmungen der Gegenwartsphilosophie Bd I, München 1987 St IV W. Stegmüller Hauptströmungen der Gegenwartsphilosophie Bd 4 Stuttgart 1989 |
| |||
The author or concept searched is found in the following theses of the more related field of specialization.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Communication | Luhmann, N. | AU Kass 13 Communication/Luhmann: the three parts 1. Information 2. Message 3. Understanding now become components of a unit. Thesis: communication only comes about when the unity comes about. And that is an improbability! The components cannot be isolated at all! They are not building blocks or atoms or existing states, which one then assembles. AU Kass 13 Communication/Luhmann: there are two possible reasons to rewind it: Misunderstandings and "No". Luhmann: Thesis: we see a connection between the autopoiesis (the openness of the "going-on-and-on") and the non-linearity of the connection (there is not only one way, as with Habermas). Question: does it not have to come to an equal distribution of "yes" and "no"? Or why is there more "yes" than "no" at all? And is that true at all? One possibility is to say that communication logically starts with understanding and not with communicating! And that the communicator always anticipates whether he will be understood, whether what he says is pleasant or unpleasant, and so on. Then the understanding is always already anticipated in a circular way! One tries to estimate success beforehand. Luhmann thesis: I believe that this anticipation is decisive for the fact that it does not constantly come to rejections. Anticipatory self-control. This can also include focusing communication on a conflict. "No" does not end communication - that could only be a misunderstanding. |
|
| |||