The Bishop’s Church: Berkeley’s Master Argument and the Paradox of Knowability

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Stephen Kearns
Keyword(s):  
Master Argument ◽  
Paradox Of Knowability

Abstract We can find in the passages that set out the Master Argument a precursor to the paradox of knowability. That paradox shows that if all truths are knowable, all truths are known. Similarly, Berkeley might be read as proposing that if all sensible objects are (distinctly) conceivable, then all sensible objects are conceived.

The Master Argument of Diodorus Cronus

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 239-252
Author(s):  
Nicholas Denyer
Keyword(s):  
Master Argument

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Stegenga
Keyword(s):  
Medical Practice ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Inductive Inference ◽  
Formal Theory ◽  
Practice Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Master Argument ◽  
Medical Interventions ◽  
Concepts Of Disease ◽  
Based Medicine

This chapter introduces the book, describes the key arguments of each chapter, and summarizes the master argument for medical nihilism. It offers a brief survey of prominent articulations of medical nihilism throughout history, and describes the contemporary evidence-based medicine movement, to set the stage for the skeptical arguments. The main arguments are based on an analysis of the concepts of disease and effectiveness, the malleability of methods in medical research, and widespread empirical findings which suggest that many medical interventions are barely effective. The chapter-level arguments are unified by our best formal theory of inductive inference in what is called the master argument for medical nihilism. The book closes by considering what medical nihilism entails for medical practice, research, and regulation.

scholarly journals ‘God kan net doen wat God wel doen’: Petrus Abelardus se Megariaanse argument in Theologia ‘Scholarium’, Opera Theologica III

2011 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Johann Beukes
Keyword(s):  
Specific Reference ◽  
Medieval Philosophy ◽  
Restricted Access ◽  
Master Argument ◽  
Philosophical Questions ◽  
The Way

‘God can only do what God does do’: Peter Abelard’s Megarian argument in Theologia ‘Scholarium’, Opera Theologica III Peter Abelard’s contribution to a constellation of central themes in post-Carolingian medieval philosophy, namely on causation, necessity and contingency, with its discursive undertone of the relation between potentiality and actuality, is worked out in a rather informal way in one of his later works, Theologia ‘Scholarium’. Typical of the fusion of philosophical questions and theological premises in medieval philosophy, Abelard addresses the issue by asking whether God can only do what God does. Abelard argues that God can do or not do or omit doing only those things which God does do or does not do or omits doing and that God can do or can not do or omit doing those things only in the way or at the time at which God does and not at any other. Given Abelard’s fragmented and restricted access to the Aristotelian corpus regarding causality, how did he come to this Aristotelian-orientated conclusion? This article stresses the ancient quality of Abelard’s argument from another angle, reminiscent of the so-called Master Argument of the Megarians, with specific reference to the dialectical legacy of Diodorus Cronus, according to whom what can be is what is: what is, in turn, is what must be. Actuality, for the Megarians, exhausts potentiality. The path of actuality cannot be undermined or compromised by issues of potentiality. God’s actions are thus for both the Megarians and Abelard strictly determined and determining. God, in the end, can only do what God does. This article contributes to scholarship in medieval philosophy or theology by making this connection explicit and by thoroughly exploring the link between Abelard and his ancient predecessors.

Assessing Kant's Master Argument

2001 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 90-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derk Pereboom
Keyword(s):  
Master Argument

scholarly journals Truth, Demonstration and Knowledge. A Classical Solution to the Paradox of Knowability

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 365-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elia Zardini
Keyword(s):  
Classical Solution ◽  
Classical Logic ◽  
Knowability Principle ◽  
Paradox Of Knowability ◽  
Bhk Semantics

After introducing semantic anti-realism and the paradox of knowability, the paper offers a reconstruction of the anti-realist argument from the theory of understanding. The proposed reconstruction validates an unrestricted principle to the effect that truth requires the existence of a certain kind of “demonstration”. The paper shows that the principle fails to imply the problematic instances of the original unrestricted knowability principle but that the overall view still has unrestricted epistemic consequences. Appealing precisely to the paradox of knowability, the paper also argues, against BHK semantics, for the non-constructive character of the demonstrations envisaged by anti-realists, and contends that, in such a setting, one of the most natural arguments in favour of a revision of classical logic loses all its force.

scholarly journals Conceptual Engineering

2020 ◽  
pp. 132-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herman Cappelen
Keyword(s):  
Good Reason ◽  
Master Argument ◽  
Conceptual Engineering

This chapter develops and defends the Master Argument for Conceptual Engineering: (1) If W is a word that has a meaning M, then there are many similar meanings, M1,M2,...,Mn, W could have. (2) We have no good reason to think that the meaning that W ended up with is the best meaning W could have: there will typically be indefinitely many alternative meanings that would be better meanings for W. (3) When we speak, think, and theorize it’s important to make sure our words have as good meanings as possible. (4) As a corollary: when doing philosophy, we should try to find good meanings for core philosophical terms and they will typically not be the meanings those words as a matter of fact have. (5) So no matter what topic a philosopher is concerned with, she should assess and ameliorate the meanings of central terms. I respond to seven objections to this argument.

The Master Argument

2013 ◽  
pp. 49-82
Author(s):  
Dennis Schulting
Keyword(s):  
Master Argument

The ‘Master Argument’ of Diodorus

1979 ◽  
pp. 297-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. H. Von Wright
Keyword(s):  
Master Argument
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document