Rational choice is not between science and common sense; it is a choice of both, of science to master the universal, and of common sense to deal with the particular. -Bernard Lonergan
Let's continue with McCarthy's (and Lonergan's) distinction between classical and historical consciousness. In my last post, I quoted McCarthy at length on Aristotle's conception of science and how elements of that conception linger in the background of contemporary philosophy of science debates. Here, I'll quote McCarthy at length on the modern shift from Aristotle's classical … Continue reading Aristotle subverted
Michael H. McCarthy's The Crisis of Philosophy has been an invaluable resource for me. I feel all-too-lucky to have obtained a discarded library copy from Amazon. McCarthy's book details philosophy's aimlessness and lack of purpose in the modern era as empirical science gathered to itself more and more of the territory traditionally held by the discipline of philosophy. … Continue reading Aristotle’s conception of science
What is relationship between epistemology and psychology? Frege and the logical positivists sharply distinguished epistemology from psychology. However, Quine's naturalized epistemology overturned this distinction, arguing that epistemology should become a chapter of psychology. This is a foundational question for epistemology. Following Frege, the logical positivists relegated the context of discovery to psychology and retained the … Continue reading Discovery and Justification – An outline for research
Gottlob Frege (left); Edmund Husserl (right) I'm at something of a standstill at the present moment. Writing a dissertation is a constant pivot between extremely detailed analysis and high-level organization. If I focus for too long on either aspect, I tend to lose sight of the other. Get too deep in the weeds, lose track … Continue reading Psychologism – An outline for research
I have not been able to write much in the last few weeks, but work continues in some form. Here's a debate in the secondary literature that I've read through, enjoyed, and will figure into the my work somewhere: Articles Harvey Siegel, "Justification, Discovery, and the Naturalizing of Epistemology," Philosophy of Science, Vol. 47. No. 2 (June … Continue reading Literature debate – Siegel v. Roth
Sometimes an author construes an idea, or list of ideas, so concisely that one cannot improve upon his formulation. This is the case for Stephen P. Schwartz's list of basic tenets of logical positivism in A Brief History of Analytic Philosophy: From Russell to Rawls, so I'll just borrow heavily from his work on this point. And, admittedly, I'm bored with logical positivism and … Continue reading Tenets of logical positivism
Another motivating question for 20th century empiricism was the nature and status of Kant’s analytic/synthetic distinction. Frege, Russell, Whitehead, Wittgenstein, Carnap and others all accepted this distinction, though the significance of distinction changed over time. Famously, Quine rejected it and viewed analytic and synthetic statements as different in degree, but not in kind. In this … Continue reading The analytic/synthetic distinction
There are several questions that motivated all the thinkers involved in the development of 20th century empiricism and philosophy of science that need to be stated explicitly. Often, these are the sorts of questions which, for everyone involved in the conversation, are presupposed and therefore, are never (or rarely) stated outright. And even if they … Continue reading The value of an empiricist account of mathematics
Previously, I discussed Ladyman and Ross's criticism of pseudo-scientific metaphysics. They have in mind versions of contemporary analytic metaphysics that rhetorically emulate science, but fail to engage science in any meaningful way. According to Ladyman and Ross, "taking naturalism seriously in metaphysics is equivalent to adopting a verificationist attitude towards both science and metaphysics" (1). … Continue reading Positivist vs. pragmatist verificationism
Improper method in metaphysics James Ladyman and Don Ross contrast their naturalized metaphysics with contemporary analytic metaphysics. They have a cluster of terms they use to refer to this misconceived form of metaphysics: a priori metaphysics, neo-scholastic metaphysics, and pseudo-scientific metaphysics. The common attribute towards which these designations point is a view that metaphysics investigates … Continue reading Pseudo-scientific and naturalized metaphysics
Dissertating Outloud 