|
Brute Fact
In contemporary philosophy, a brute fact is a fact that cannot be explained in terms of a deeper, more "fundamental" fact. There are two main ways to explain something: say what "brought it about", or describe it at a more "fundamental" level. For example, a cat displayed on a computer screen can be explained, more "fundamentally", in terms of certain voltages in bits of metal in the screen, which in turn can be explained, more "fundamentally", in terms of certain subatomic particles moving in a certain manner. If one were to keep explaining the world in this way and reach a point at which no more "deeper" explanations can be given, then one would have found some facts which are brute or inexplicable, in the sense that we cannot give them an ontological explanation. As it might be put, there may exist some things that just ''are''. To reject the existence of brute facts is to think that everything can be explained ("Everything can be explained" is sometimes called the principle of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ontology
In metaphysics, ontology is the philosophical study of being, as well as related concepts such as existence, becoming, and reality. Ontology addresses questions like how entities are grouped into categories and which of these entities exist on the most fundamental level. Ontologists often try to determine what the categories or highest kinds are and how they form a system of categories that encompasses classification of all entities. Commonly proposed categories include substances, properties, relations, states of affairs and events. These categories are characterized by fundamental ontological concepts, including particularity and universality, abstractness and concreteness, or possibility and necessity. Of special interest is the concept of ontological dependence, which determines whether the entities of a category exist on the most fundamental level. Disagreements within ontology are often about whether entities belonging to a certain category exist and, if so, how th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Is–ought Problem
The is–ought problem, as articulated by the Scottish philosopher and historian David Hume, arises when one makes claims about what ''ought'' to be that are based solely on statements about what ''is''. Hume found that there seems to be a significant difference between descriptive or positive statements (about what is) and prescriptive or normative statements (about what ought to be), and that it is not obvious how one can coherently move from descriptive statements to prescriptive ones. Hume's law or Hume's guillotine is the thesis that, if a reasoner only has access to non-moral and non-evaluative factual premises, the reasoner cannot logically infer the truth of moral statements.Cohon, Rachel, "Hume's Moral Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/hume-moral/.> A similar view is defended by G. E. Moore's open-question argument, intended to refute any id ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Analysis (journal)
''Analysis'' is a peer-reviewed academic journal of philosophy established in 1933 that is published quarterly by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Analysis Trust. Prior to January 2009, the journal was published by Blackwell Publishing. Electronic access to this journal is available via JSTOR (1933–2013), Wiley InterScience (1996–2008), and Oxford Journals (2009–present). The journal publishes short, concise articles (of up to 4000 words, excluding bibliography) in virtually any field of the analytic tradition. Editors * 1933–1948 Austin Duncan-Jones * 1948–1956 Margaret MacDonald * 1956–1965 Bernard Mayo * 1965–1971 Peter Winch * 1971–1976 C. J. F. Williams * 1976–1987 Christopher Kirwan * 1987–1999 Peter Smith * 2000–2016 Michael Clark * 2016–2017 Chris Daly and David Liggins * 2017-2021 David Liggins * 2021- Stacie Friend, David Liggins and Lee Walters Notable articles A number of seminal works have been published in the journal. Som ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Münchhausen Trilemma
In epistemology, the Münchhausen trilemma, also commonly known as the Agrippan trilemma, is a thought experiment intended to demonstrate the theoretical impossibility of proving any truth, even in the fields of logic and mathematics, without appealing to accepted assumptions. If it is asked how any given proposition is known to be true, proof may be provided. Yet that same question can be asked of the proof, and any subsequent proof. The Münchhausen trilemma is that there are only three ways of completing a proof: * The circular argument, in which the proof of some proposition presupposes the truth of that very proposition * The regressive argument, in which each proof requires a further proof, ''ad infinitum'' * The dogmatic argument, which rests on accepted precepts which are merely asserted rather than defended The trilemma, then, is the decision among the three equally unsatisfying options. The name ''Münchhausen-Trilemma'' was coined by the German philosopher Han ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Question Of Fact
In law, a question of law, also known as a point of law, is a question that must be answered by applying relevant legal principles to interpretation of the law. Such a question is distinct from a question of fact, which must be answered by reference to facts and evidence as well as inferences arising from those facts. Answers to questions of law are generally expressed in terms of broad legal principles and can be applied to many situations rather than be dependent on particular circumstances or factual situations. An answer to a question of law as applied to the particular facts of a case is often referred to as a ''conclusion of law''. In several civil law jurisdictions, the highest courts deem questions of fact as having been settled by the lower courts and will only consider questions of law. They thus may refer a case back to a lower court to re-apply the law and answer any fact-based evaluations based on their answer on the application of the law. International courts such as ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Norm (philosophy)
Norms are concepts ( sentences) of practical import, oriented to affecting an action, rather than conceptual abstractions that describe, explain, and express. Normative sentences imply "ought-to" types of statements and assertions, in distinction to sentences that provide "is" types of statements and assertions. Common normative sentences include commands, permissions, and prohibitions; common normative abstract concepts include ''sincerity'', ''justification'', and ''honesty''. A popular account of norms describes them as reasons to take action, to believe, and to feel. Types of norms Orders and permissions express norms. Such norm sentences do not describe how the world is, they rather prescribe how the world should be. Imperative sentences are the most obvious way to express norms, but declarative sentences also may be norms, as is the case with laws or 'principles'. Generally, whether an expression is a norm depends on what the sentence intends to assert. For instance, a s ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Value Theory
In ethics and the social sciences, value theory involves various approaches that examine how, why, and to what degree humans value things and whether the object or subject of valuing is a person, idea, object, or anything else. Within philosophy, it is also known as ethics or axiology. Traditionally, philosophical investigations in value theory have sought to understand the concept of " the good". Today, some work in value theory has trended more towards empirical sciences, recording what people do value and attempting to understand why they value it in the context of psychology, sociology, and economics. In ecological economics, value theory is separated into two types: donor-type value and receiver-type value. Ecological economists tend to believe that 'real wealth' needs an accrual-determined value as a measure of what things were needed to make an item or generate a service ( H. T. Odum, ''Environmental Accounting: Emergy and environmental decision-making'', 1996). In o ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Fact
A fact is a datum about one or more aspects of a circumstance, which, if accepted as true and proven true, allows a logical conclusion to be reached on a true–false evaluation. Standard reference works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified by repeatable careful observation or measurement by experiments or other means. For example, "This sentence contains words." accurately describes a linguistic fact, and "The sun is a star" accurately describes an astronomical fact. Further, "Abraham Lincoln was the 16th President of the United States" and "Abraham Lincoln was assassinated" both accurately describe historical facts. Generally speaking, facts are independent of belief and of knowledge and opinion. Facts are different from theories, values, and objects. Etymology and usage The word ''fact'' derives from the Latin ''factum''. It was first used in English with the same meaning: "a thing done or performed"a meaning now obsolete."Fact" (1a). Oxf ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Four Causes
The four causes or four explanations are, in Aristotelian thought, four fundamental types of answer to the question "why?", in analysis of change or movement in nature: the material, the formal, the efficient, and the final. Aristotle wrote that "we do not have knowledge of a thing until we have grasped its why, that is to say, its cause."" r a full range of cases, an explanation which fails to invoke all four causes is no explanation at all."—Falcon, Andrea. 0062019.Four Causes , Aristotle on Causality" ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. While there are cases in which classifying a "cause" is difficult, or in which "causes" might merge, Aristotle held that his four "causes" provided an analytical scheme of general applicability. Aristotle's word ''aitia'' () has, in philosophical scholarly tradition, been translated as 'cause'. This peculiar, specialized, technical, usage of the word 'cause' is not that of everyday English language. Rather, the translation of Aristo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
The Principle Of Sufficient Reason
The principle of sufficient reason states that everything must have a reason or a cause. The principle was articulated and made prominent by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, with many antecedents, and was further used and developed by Arthur Schopenhauer and Sir William Hamilton, 9th Baronet. History The modern formulation of the principle is usually ascribed to early Enlightenment philosopher Gottfried Leibniz. Leibniz formulated it, but was not an originator.See chapter on Leibniz and Spinoza in A. O. Lovejoy, ''The Great Chain of Being''. The idea was conceived of and utilized by various philosophers who preceded him, including Anaximander, Parmenides, Archimedes, Plato and Aristotle,Hamilton 1860:66 Cicero, Avicenna, Thomas Aquinas, and Spinoza. One often pointed to is in Anselm of Canterbury: his phras''quia Deus nihil sine ratione facit''and the formulation of the ontological argument for the existence of God. A clearer connection is with the cosmological argument for t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
First Principle
In philosophy and science, a first principle is a basic proposition or assumption that cannot be deduced from any other proposition or assumption. First principles in philosophy are from First Cause attitudes and taught by Aristotelians, and nuanced versions of first principles are referred to as postulates by Kantians. In mathematics, first principles are referred to as axioms or postulates. In physics and other sciences, theoretical work is said to be from first principles, or ''ab initio'', if it starts directly at the level of established science and does not make assumptions such as empirical model and parameter fitting. "First principles thinking" consists of deriving things to their fundamental proven axioms in the given arena, before reasoning up by asking which ones are relevant to the question at hand, then cross referencing conclusions based on chosen axioms and making sure conclusions do not violate any fundamental laws. Physicists include counterintuitive concepts ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Principle Of Sufficient Reason
The principle of sufficient reason states that everything must have a reason or a cause. The principle was articulated and made prominent by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, with many antecedents, and was further used and developed by Arthur Schopenhauer and Sir William Hamilton, 9th Baronet. History The modern formulation of the principle is usually ascribed to early Enlightenment philosopher Gottfried Leibniz. Leibniz formulated it, but was not an originator.See chapter on Leibniz and Spinoza in A. O. Lovejoy, ''The Great Chain of Being''. The idea was conceived of and utilized by various philosophers who preceded him, including Anaximander, Parmenides, Archimedes, Plato and Aristotle,Hamilton 1860:66 Cicero, Avicenna, Thomas Aquinas, and Spinoza. One often pointed to is in Anselm of Canterbury: his phras''quia Deus nihil sine ratione facit''and the formulation of the ontological argument for the existence of God. A clearer connection is with the cosmological argument for the ex ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
