KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy最新文献_第3页

Degeneration and Entropy 退化和熵

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2022-01-10 DOI: 10.1515/krt-2021-0032

E. Chua

引用次数: 0

HYPER-REF: A General Model of Reference for First-Order Logic and First-Order Arithmetic 一阶逻辑和一阶算术的一般参考模型HYPER-REF

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2022-01-10 DOI: 10.1515/krt-2021-0033

Pablo Rivas-Robledo

引用次数: 0

Learning by Ignoring the Most Wrong 通过忽略最大的错误来学习

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-12-24 DOI: 10.1515/krt-2021-0028

S. Bradley

引用次数: 4

Compatibilist Libertarianism: Advantages and Challenges (Conference Report) 兼容自由主义:优势与挑战(会议报告)

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-12-23 DOI: 10.1515/krt-2021-0035

J.-F. Müller

引用次数: 0

Coherence and Reduction 连贯与还原

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-12-07 DOI: 10.1515/krt-2021-0031

Andrea Giuseppe Ragno

{"title":"Coherence and Reduction","authors":"Andrea Giuseppe Ragno","doi":"10.1515/krt-2021-0031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/krt-2021-0031","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Synchronic intertheoretic reductions are an important field of research in science. Arguably, the best model able to represent the main relations occurring in this kind of scientific reduction is the Nagelian account of reduction, a model further developed by Schaffner and nowadays known as the generalized version of the Nagel–Schaffner model (GNS). In their article (2010), Dizadji-Bahmani, Frigg, and Hartmann (DFH) specified the two main desiderata of a reduction á la GNS: confirmation and coherence. DFH first and, more rigorously, Tešic (2017) later analyse the confirmatory relation between the reducing and the reduced theory in terms of Bayesian confirmation theory. The purpose of this article is to analyse and compare the degree of coherence between the two theories involved in the GNS before and after the reduction. For this reason, in the first section, I will be looking at the reduction of thermodynamics to statistical mechanics and use it as an example to describe the GNS. In the second section, I will introduce three coherence measures which will then be employed in the comparison. Finally, in the last two sections, I will compare the degrees of coherence between the reducing and the reduced theory before and after the reduction and use a few numerical examples to understand the relation between coherence and confirmation measures.","PeriodicalId":107351,"journal":{"name":"KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy","volume":"138 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132283886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Wittgenstein, Ordinary Language, and Poeticity 维特根斯坦:日常语言与诗意

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI: 10.1515/krt-2021-0036

David Hommen

{"title":"Wittgenstein, Ordinary Language, and Poeticity","authors":"David Hommen","doi":"10.1515/krt-2021-0036","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/krt-2021-0036","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The later Wittgenstein famously holds that an understanding which tries to run up against the limits of language bumps itself and results in nothing but plain nonsense. Therefore, the task of philosophy cannot be to create an ‘ideal’ language so as to produce a ‘real’ understanding for the first time; its aim must be to remove particular misunderstandings by clarifying the use of our ordinary language. Accordingly, Wittgenstein opposes both the sublime terms of traditional philosophy and the formal frameworks of modern logics—and adheres to a pointedly casual, colloquial style in his own philosophizing. However, there seems to lurk a certain inconsistency in Wittgenstein’s ordinary language approach: his philosophical remarks frequently remain enigmatic, and many of the terms Wittgenstein coins seem to be highly technical. Thus, one might wonder whether his verdicts on the limits of language and on philosophical jargons might not be turned against his own practice. The present essay probes the extent to which the contravening tendencies in Wittgenstein’s mature philosophy might be reconciled. Section 2 sketches Wittgenstein’s general approach to philosophy and tracks the special rôle that the language of everyday life occupies therein. Section 3 reconstructs Wittgenstein’s preferred method for philosophy, which he calls perspicuous representation, and argues that this method implements an aesthetic conception of philosophy and a poetic approach to philosophical language, in which philosophical insights are not explicitly stated, but mediated through well-worded and creatively composed descriptions. Section 4 discusses how Wittgenstein’s philosophical poetics relates to artificial terminologies and grammars in philosophy and science.","PeriodicalId":107351,"journal":{"name":"KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130715175","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Reflections on Popular Culture and Philosophy 大众文化与哲学反思

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI: 10.1515/krt-2021-0038

A. Christian

引用次数: 1

Popularizing Moral Philosophy by Acting as a Moral Expert 以道德专家的身份普及道德哲学

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI: 10.1515/krt-2021-0037

Frauke Albersmeier

{"title":"Popularizing Moral Philosophy by Acting as a Moral Expert","authors":"Frauke Albersmeier","doi":"10.1515/krt-2021-0037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/krt-2021-0037","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper is concerned with the ethics of popularizing moral philosophy. In particular, it addresses the question of whether ethicists engaged in public debates should restrict themselves to acting as impartial informants or moderators rather than advocates of their own moral opinions. I dismiss the idea that being an impartial servant to moral debates is the default or even the only defensible way to publicly exercise ethical expertise and thus, to popularize moral philosophy. Using a case example from the public debate about the human use of nonhuman animals, I highlight the benefits and risks of endorsing an advocate’s and a teacher’s or moderator’s role, respectively. I argue for a general requirement of judgment transparency which entails that the publicly engaged philosopher ought to be clear and consistent about the type of role she takes on, her publicly advanced opinions generally ought to be her professional ones and that she ought to flag her private opinions. I finally show that, despite general concerns about conflicts of interest, exercising ethical expertise and engaging in advocacy, i.e., acting as if one were a moral expert, are not incompatible modes of public engagement for the moral philosopher.","PeriodicalId":107351,"journal":{"name":"KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129127640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Introduction to the Special Issue “Popularizing Philosophy” 《普及哲学》特刊简介

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI: 10.1515/krt-2022-0004

Frauke Albersmeier, A. Christian

引用次数: 0

Conciliatory Views on Peer Disagreement and the Order of Evidence Acquisition 同侪分歧与证据获取顺序之调解观点

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-09-29 DOI: 10.1515/krt-2021-0023

Marc Weber

引用次数: 1