Comments on: A Slice of Ontology http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/ "Austro" as in Rothbard and Wittgenstein, "Athenian" as in Aristotle and smashing-the-plutocracy. Sun, 12 Feb 2012 05:00:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: We Will Argue on the Plains, We Will Argue on the Beaches | Austro-Athenian Empire http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/comment-page-1/#comment-355546 We Will Argue on the Plains, We Will Argue on the Beaches | Austro-Athenian Empire Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:09:27 +0000 http://aaeblog.com/?p=4603#comment-355546 [...] schedule for this week’s previously mentioned Auburn Philosophy Conference (Feb. 25-27) is online, along with a few of the papers. Ontology as [...] [...] schedule for this week’s previously mentioned Auburn Philosophy Conference (Feb. 25-27) is online, along with a few of the papers. Ontology as [...]

]]> By: Roderick http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/comment-page-1/#comment-355223 Roderick Mon, 08 Feb 2010 05:30:50 +0000 http://aaeblog.com/?p=4603#comment-355223 It's his work on reference and modality in <em>Naming and Necessity</em>, not the Wittgenstein-on-rule-following stuff (which I think is confused), that influenced me. It’s his work on reference and modality in Naming and Necessity, not the Wittgenstein-on-rule-following stuff (which I think is confused), that influenced me.

]]> By: MBH http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/comment-page-1/#comment-355221 MBH Mon, 08 Feb 2010 04:59:26 +0000 http://aaeblog.com/?p=4603#comment-355221 Kinda random: quibble alert. I just read Read's <em>What 'There Can Be No Such Thing As Meaning Anything By Any Word' Could Possibly Mean</em>. I'm sold. Out of curiosity: why do you list Kripke as an influence. Does that mean you embrace meaning-nihilism or meaning-skepticism? It just doesn't seem to fit. Then again, I'm only familiar with Kripke's philosophy of language. What am I missing? Kinda random: quibble alert. I just read Read’s What ‘There Can Be No Such Thing As Meaning Anything By Any Word’ Could Possibly Mean.

I’m sold.

Out of curiosity: why do you list Kripke as an influence. Does that mean you embrace meaning-nihilism or meaning-skepticism? It just doesn’t seem to fit. Then again, I’m only familiar with Kripke’s philosophy of language. What am I missing?

]]> By: MBH http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/comment-page-1/#comment-355206 MBH Sun, 07 Feb 2010 15:41:41 +0000 http://aaeblog.com/?p=4603#comment-355206 Has anyone ever conducted an empirical study to measure things like blood flow, heart rate, brain activity, energy generation, etc. in persons who are thinking vs. persons who believe they're thinking, but aren't? (I'm probably falling into the latter category on this issue... but I do recognize a certain shift in perspective when I recognize that what I believe is a thought is not.) I mean, do we know -- physiologically -- what happens when a person has the "I can go on" sensation when figuring a series? vs. What happens when they can't? More technically, what happens in the body when a person shifts an analytic <em>a priori</em> judgment into a synthetic <em>a priori</em> judgment? And just as interesting, what happens when a person tries but cannot make that shift? If there hasn't been this kind of study, can we please do it? Has anyone ever conducted an empirical study to measure things like blood flow, heart rate, brain activity, energy generation, etc. in persons who are thinking vs. persons who believe they’re thinking, but aren’t? (I’m probably falling into the latter category on this issue… but I do recognize a certain shift in perspective when I recognize that what I believe is a thought is not.)

I mean, do we know — physiologically — what happens when a person has the “I can go on” sensation when figuring a series? vs. What happens when they can’t? More technically, what happens in the body when a person shifts an analytic a priori judgment into a synthetic a priori judgment? And just as interesting, what happens when a person tries but cannot make that shift?

If there hasn’t been this kind of study, can we please do it?

]]> By: Richard Garner http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/comment-page-1/#comment-355205 Richard Garner Sun, 07 Feb 2010 13:54:07 +0000 http://aaeblog.com/?p=4603#comment-355205 I had a teaching placement with Rupert Read, teaching "The Philosophy of Social Sciences." He also ran as a green in the recent Norwich North by-election against the second ever Libertarian Party UK candidate, and the youngest ever PPC. The LPUK did very badly then! I had a teaching placement with Rupert Read, teaching “The Philosophy of Social Sciences.” He also ran as a green in the recent Norwich North by-election against the second ever Libertarian Party UK candidate, and the youngest ever PPC. The LPUK did very badly then!

]]> By: MBH http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/comment-page-1/#comment-355203 MBH Sun, 07 Feb 2010 06:25:08 +0000 http://aaeblog.com/?p=4603#comment-355203 More of my ruminations on time <a href="http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/s/a/satyagraha/2009/12/is-time-real.php" rel="nofollow">here</a>. More of my ruminations on time here.

]]> By: MBH http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/comment-page-1/#comment-355202 MBH Sun, 07 Feb 2010 06:03:37 +0000 http://aaeblog.com/?p=4603#comment-355202 Horava: <em>“I’m going back to Newton’s idea that time and space are not equivalent..."</em> That sounds like an appeal to alikeness/difference. Horava: “I’m going back to Newton’s idea that time and space are not equivalent…”

That sounds like an appeal to alikeness/difference.

]]> By: Roderick http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/comment-page-1/#comment-355200 Roderick Sun, 07 Feb 2010 04:27:59 +0000 http://aaeblog.com/?p=4603#comment-355200 How do you see the physics article as relating to the Read piece? I see the physics article as being about how time and space <em>interact</em>, and the Read article as about whether time and space are <em>alike</em>. How do you see the physics article as relating to the Read piece? I see the physics article as being about how time and space interact, and the Read article as about whether time and space are alike.

]]> By: Roderick http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/comment-page-1/#comment-355199 Roderick Sun, 07 Feb 2010 04:24:44 +0000 http://aaeblog.com/?p=4603#comment-355199 Van Inwagen takes an ordinary Aristotelean attitude toward living organisms, but a radically eliminative attitude toward all other objects above the level of particle physics. Seems a bit Brahean. Van Inwagen takes an ordinary Aristotelean attitude toward living organisms, but a radically eliminative attitude toward all other objects above the level of particle physics. Seems a bit Brahean.

]]> By: MBH http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/06/a-slice-of-ontology/comment-page-1/#comment-355195 MBH Sat, 06 Feb 2010 21:23:23 +0000 http://aaeblog.com/?p=4603#comment-355195 The Read piece is beautiful. The data from contemporary physics can be seen as proof. Check <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=splitting-time-from-space" rel="nofollow">this</a> out. The Read piece is beautiful.

The data from contemporary physics can be seen as proof.

Check this out.

]]>