The Truth in Modalism

2019 ◽  
pp. 145-191
Author(s):  
Sanford Shieh

This chapter takes up two further issues about Frege’s attitude towards modality. First, Frege doesn’t simply reject the relativization of truth. He gives amodalist explanations of linguistic phenomena that seem to show that truth is relative to time, and of talk of truth in various circumstances. Second, Frege’s truth-absolutism is not incompatible with two analyses of modality prominent in the history of philosophy: in terms of a priori knowledge and in terms of analytic truth. But Frege construes apriority and analyticity in logical terms. Thus, ultimately, Frege’s view is that if there are any modal distinctions, they amount to nothing more than logical distinctions. An interesting consequence of Frege’s accounts of apriority, analyticity, and modality is that they allow not only for synthetic a priori truths, but also necessary a posteriori and contingent a priori truths.

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-168
Author(s):  
Michał Wendland

The article concerns some of the most important elements of I. Kant’s epistemology and its connections with earlier epistemological ideas, namely rationalism and empiricism. The history of dispute between rationalism (Descartes, Leibniz) and empiricism (Locke, Berkeley, Hume) is hereby shortly presented while Kant’s own philosophical achievements are suggested to be both alternative and synthesis of these. The main core of this paper is summary of basis of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason; some most important categories are described: apriorism, synthetic and analytical judgements, knowledge a priori and a posteriori, main ideas of transcendental esthetics (two forms of pure intuition: time and space), main ideas of transcendental logic (forms of judgement and twelve categories). Also the meaning of Kant’s „copernican revolution” is presented as a turning point for classical German philosophy as well as for whole modern epistemology.


1992 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 179-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graciela De Pierris

The modem rationalist tradition initiated by Descartes has as one of its central tenets the independence of the human understanding from the senses. Regardless of the different ways in which independence from experience is understood, there is much common ground among the modem views on the a priori. Yet Kant, culminating this tradition, introduces an entirely new conception of the a priori never before articulated in the history of philosophy. This is the notion of elements in knowledge which are independent of experience but nevertheless closely connected, in a special way, with experience.Although for Kant the a priori has a privileged position in the structure of knowledge - as it has for other modem rationalist philosophers - one of the most striking, and often neglected, aspect of his conception of the a priori is the great extent to which it is opposed to foundationalism.


Author(s):  
Pedro Mansilla Viedma

Como el título sugiere, el artículo pretende reflexionar sobre el punto de vista de la sociología sobre la moda, exagerando irónicamente lo específico de su punto de vista hasta elevarlo a “privilegiado”. Utilizo esa exageración para llamar la atención sobre la doble dimensión teórica de esa mirada. Una primera, fácil de entender, y quizás de aceptar, subraya la lectura sociológica de una moda ya pasada, como puede hacerlo la historia del arte, del traje o de la moda. Otra segunda, atreviéndose a reflexionar, o a invitarnos a reflexionar, sobre su otro punto de vista. Aquel que condicionaría el nacimiento mismo de la moda desde la sociología. La moda a posteriori es analizada, la moda a priori también, y aquí, donde la moda es efecto de una causa sociológica, y no al revés, es donde radicaría el verdadero interés de mi artículo. ¿Son antes los pantalones femeninos, el traje femenino, el smoking femenino –robados psicoanalíticamente al hombre durante el siglo XX– o la emancipación de la mujer? ¿Apareció siempre la minifalda después de la liberaciónsexual femenina o alguna vez, en algún país, fue al revés? ¿El movimiento hippie creó siempre una moda hippie o la imitación de la moda hippie invitó, en su onda expansiva mundial, a un estilo de vida consecuente con ese cambio de ropa? Estamos acostumbrados a que la moda sea un efecto, ¿puede ser una causa? Estamos acostumbrados a que la sociología explique un fenómeno, ¿aceptaríamos que a veces se pueda convertir en su causa?PALABRAS CLAVE: sociología, moda, causa, objeto de arte, contexto.ABSTRACTAs the title suggests, this article aims to reflect on the sociological viewpoint on fashion, ironically exaggerating the specifics of its point of view to elevate it to the point of “privilege”. I use this exaggeration to draw attention to the theoretical double dimension of that viewpoint. A first one, easy to understand and perhaps to accept, highlights the sociological reading of past fashion trends, as may History of Art, Costume or Fashion. A second one would dare to reflect, or to invite us to reflect, on this other point of view, one that would condition the very birth of Fashion from Sociology. Fashion is analyzed both a posteriori and a priori, and here, where Fashion is the effect of a sociological cause, and not the other way round, is where the true interest of my article would lie. Do women’s trousers, women’s tailored suits, women’s tuxedos –psychoanalytically robbed from men during the twentieth century– precede the emancipation of women or is it the other way around? Didthe miniskirt always appear after women’s sexual liberation, or was it the other way around in some countries? Did the hippie movement give rise to the hippie clothes style or did the hippie style, in its worldwide expansion, invite participation in a lifestyle consistent with that change in clothing? We are used to seeing Fashion as an effect. Could it be a cause? We are used to Sociology explaining a phenomenon, would we be willing to accept that it can at times be the cause of it?KEY WORDS: sociology, fashion, cause, art object, context.


Author(s):  
Donald T. Siebert

This chapter argues for the History of England’s importance in Hume’s overall achievement. The chapter describes the History’s genesis, reception, methods, and aims. In the role of historian, Hume shared with the ancients the assumption that history is an elevated genre functioning as the “Mistress of Wisdom.” Yet this long work is more notable for historiographical innovation. Like William Robertson and Edward Gibbon, Hume wrote conjectural or philosophical history. Like Machiavelli, Voltaire, and Montesquieu, Hume wrote civil or cultural history, including detailed information on political events, law, commerce, and manners. In a larger sense, the History demonstrates a great philosopher leaving his study (or “closet”) to deal with that practical, sometimes intractable world outside the study. A priori reasoning is tested against that a posteriori reality provided by historical evidence. Thus, in writing the History, Hume became an empiricist in an almost literal sense.


Author(s):  
Vitaly Nikolayevich Yushchenko

The paper briefly examines the history of the intro-duction into scientific use of the concept of “men-tality”. In the aspect of the personalistic philosophi-cal approach, the author analyzes the reasons for the difficulties arising in its definition. It is argued that the phenomenon of mentality is subjective and objective in nature, therefore, its certain reification in socio-philosophical discourse is inevitable. Howev-er, the excessive emphasis of the researcher on the a priori personality of the qualities of one or another ethnic mentality should not be considered correct. Closer to the truth will be the understanding of men-tality as an a posteriori and relative totality of per-sonality traits acquired under the influence of a par-ticular social environment. The conclusion is made that the social environment is the most important factor in the formation of ethnic mentality. Under its direct influence, the processes of socialization of individuals take place, the experience of generations is transmitted and improved. However, one should also take into account the reverse influence of the formed ethnic mentality on the social environment. The social environment and ethnic mentality mutual-ly condition each other, and the person, logically and historically, acts as an active constructive prin-ciple, whose creative work is possible only in condi-tions of social life.


Problemos ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 78 ◽  
pp. 31-42
Author(s):  
Gintaras Kabelka

Straipsnyje nagrinėjami Lietuvos filosofijos istoriografijos marksistinės metodologijos darbai, kuriems būdingas vadinamasis horizontalusis redukcionizmas. Eksplikuojama Lietuvos marksistinės filosofijos istoriografijos veikalų metodologinė struktūra, parodomas jiems būdingo vadinamojo aiškinimo solipsizmonevienodas laipsnis. Analizuojami filosofijos raidos marksistiniai vaizdiniai, teigiama, kad jie pagrįsti progreso idėja. Nagrinėjamas Eugenijaus Meškausko teorinių principų poveikis filosofijos istorijostyrimams Lietuvoje (Juozo Mureikos, Albino Lozuraičio darbai), kuris pasireiškia marksizmo kaip tam tikro problemų sprendimo būdo traktuote bei filosofijos dėsningo vystymosi sampratos plėtote. Apžvelgiamipaties marksizmo istorijos tyrinėjimai.Pagrindiniai žodžiai: filosofijos istoriografija, marksizmas, horizontalusis redukcionizmas.Marxist Historiography of Philosophy in Lithuania: Horizontal ReductionismGintaras Kabelka SummaryThe article analyzes the Marxist methodology of historiography of philosophy in Lithuania. The so-called interpretative solipsism is characteristic of the horizontal reductionism. It enforces the conceptual apparatus of its own theoretical position upon the subject of research, without considering whether the terms of that apparatus have something in common with the content of the subject. There are different degrees of interpretative solipsism in the Lithuanian history of philosophy. Zaksas is a priori convinced that his own theory is impeccable and that the subject of inquiry is undoubtedly fallacious and theoretically worthless. Balčius and Griška pay more attention to the description of the subject of inquiry. They rely on the materialistic, atheistic and scientist aspects of Marxism. Lozuraitis and Mureika regard Marxism as quite a reliable method of solving some theoretical problems. Their approach is akin to the methodology of the history of problems.Keywords: historiography of philosophy, Marxism, horizontal reductionism.sp;


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document