We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Peirce’s concept of science entails that normative judgment in science, about which types of theory or explanation or evidence, etc., are good, must depend on the evidence provided by the experience of inquiring (Chapter 2), a thesis supported by the history of science (Chapter 3). This implies a method, at once empirical and normative, which Peirce’s late sketch of a trio of ’normative sciences’ (aesthetics, ethics, logic) generalizes and rationalizes. Its generalization is supported by Peirce’s expansion of empiricism (Chapter 7), and its rationalization depends on the rediscovery of final causation (Chapter 6). Although sketchy, Peirce’s idea of normative sciences is important; for its plausibility undermines that most pernicious of dichotomies, of fact and value. This chapter explicates Peirce’s idea of normative science, traces its method from Schiller’s aesthetics through Kant’s ethics, and suggests that the rediscovery of final causation corrects what is most problematic in Kant’s metaphysics of morals, viz., its anti-naturalism.
This chapter introduces the book’s key aims: showing how a logical possibility operator helps formulate potentialist set theory, intuitively justify the ZFC axioms, clarify applied mathematics and more.
This chapter presents (and notes certain advantages of) a basic modal if-thenist strategy for nominalistically paraphrasing Platonism theories in response to indispensability arguments.
This chapter presents the referentialist revolution that occurred in 1970 through the new arguments, notions, and theses it introduced in semantics and philosophy. In particular, it introduces modal, semantic, and epistemic arguments against descriptivism, the central concept of a rigid designator, and the theses of semantic externalism and Direct Reference.
Rorty believed that taking the linguistic turn meant rejecting the idea of “immediate experience,” and he was equally certain that philosophy had nothing of value to offer social and political theory. Those convictions distinguished his version of neopragmatism from those of his contemporaries Hillary Putnam, Ruth Anna Putnam, and Richard J. Bernstein, and from the ideas of his predecessors William James and John Dewey. In his last book, Achieving Our Country, Rorty sought to respond to the critics who challenged his public/private dualism by aligning himself with the Cold War-era labor movement. He remained unwilling, however, to acknowledge the costs of moving from the social democratic “historical Dewey” to his preferred “hypothetical Dewey,” an insouciant proto-Rorty who attributed progressive changes to “lucky accidents” and championed the poetized culture of liberal ironism over the hard work of forging new democratic alliances among a new generation of activists inspired by demands for recognition as well as redistribution.
This chapter first focuses on artificial emotions, and then moves on to machine consciousness, reflecting the fact that emotions and consciousness have been treated independently and by different communities in artificial intelligence (AI). It reviews the philosophical perspectives of two pioneers in AI and philosophy of mind, Alan Turing and Hilary Putnam, respectively. The chapter discusses the philosophical implications of AI research on emotions and consciousness. Much research on the role of emotions in artificial agents has been motivated by an analysis of possible functional roles of emotions in natural systems. Work on emotions in AI can be roughly divided into two strands (with a small overlap): communicative aspects and architectural aspects. Emotion research has become an active interdisciplinary subfield in AI, and machine consciousness is on the verge of establishing a research community that pursues the design of conscious machines.
This chapter deals with an old problem that lies at the intersection of metaphysics and the philosophy of language. It presents some preliminary comments on ethical naturalism and on the representational view of language. The chapter is concerned with ethical naturalism in its manifestation as a realistically construed version of cognitivism in ethics, where what divides the cognitivist from the expressivist is that the former takes talk of ethical properties seriously. It describes two very different ways to respond to the problem. One sees ethical properties as solutions to something roughly akin to a set of simultaneous equations, a set that captures the way ethical concepts form an interlocking network, a network which is, to some extent, still under negotiation. The other draws on recent work on reference to natural kinds, inspired most especially by Hilary Putnam.
This chapter discusses Saul Kripke's general objections to the notion of adopting a logic. The main issue Kripke chose to talk about first is whether logic is a set of statements, and not whether logic is revisable. Kripke also criticized the view that the notion of "adopting a logic" is a coherent one. The whole point of introducing quantum logic is to put quantum mechanics on a sound foundation, making it paradox-free. Hilary Putnam refers to a formal system that he calls "quantum logic", which he says can "be read off from Hilbert space". Unlike quantum logic, intuitionist logic is commonly given as the most standard example of a change in logic. Intuitionists have supposedly adopted a logic different from "the received one" and have based a whole different system of mathematics upon it, as well as having rejected classical mathematics.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.