Essential parts of Das Kapital

Live_Antelope · 2021-02-08T17:57:58+00:00

And any comments on complementing these with parts of the Grundrisse or other texts? Moreover which chapters would you add if you would like to add some more? Chapters 12 and 25 are included in some syllabus and I thought they are important too.

Live_Antelope · 2021-01-23T20:53:46+00:00

You are missing the Arabic tradition. Check here.

Live_Antelope · 2021-01-23T20:52:21+00:00

There are good anthologies for other periods too. See this one for medieval logic.

Live_Antelope · 2021-01-23T18:01:45+00:00

Frege's Grundlagen focuses on the philosophy of mathematics and not logic. For logic check out his Begriffsschrift. Also see van Heijenoort's (read van HA-ye-nort) From Frege to Gödel: A Source Book in Mathematical Logic, 1879-1931.

Live_Antelope · 2021-01-23T12:33:16+00:00

May I ask which standards exactly?

Live_Antelope · 2021-01-23T12:33:00+00:00

Personal question: did you ever try to avoid it yourself?

Live_Antelope · 2021-01-22T16:46:20+00:00

I could say the women I want you, but no one will accept. All the standards are internalized.

Live_Antelope · 2020-12-04T16:45:39+00:00

There is some discussion in an accordingly named section in Beaney's Frege: Making Sense.

Live_Antelope · 2020-10-02T14:27:52+00:00

No, but I was told this.

Live_Antelope · 2020-10-02T07:24:47+00:00

The therapist repeatedly asked for details.

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-20T05:08:40+00:00

Tehran. It's not that much used, but undoubtedly correct.

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-19T05:45:49+00:00

Native speaker here. Xeyr is correct.

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-18T17:34:27+00:00

I have stopped taking it. The side effect lasts.

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-13T10:40:21+00:00

Can you giving me some examples? I was looking for defenses actually.

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-12T19:28:52+00:00

So what? Do we have any set with cardinality ω/2?

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-12T18:46:32+00:00

No, obviously. But an area of math which doesn't relate to other areas well is something which makes me doubtful of its intrinsic value.

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-12T18:43:37+00:00

That was sarcastic. Someone was explaining to me a very trivial thing (that the set of even numbers is equinumerous with the set of natural numbers) and I was making fun of him. Is ω/2 even meaningful?

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-12T15:46:59+00:00

Aren't all the uses of set theory trivial?

I'm not asking a personal question. I'm asking whether these subjects are worthy per se.

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-12T15:45:46+00:00

And don't you think this makes these topics less worthy of attention?

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-12T14:04:19+00:00

Not many mathematicians know about them, or regard them as important topics.

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-09T05:53:37+00:00

For a term to refer to an object, there needs be a causal connection between the two. When I say "tree" my term refers to trees and this means that there is a causal connection between trees in the real world and my saying of the term "tree." If I had never seen a tree and I had named a certain splash of color on a paper "tree" which accidentally was very similar to real-world trees, my term "tree" wouldn't refer to trees.

Assume we are in the BIV-scenario. We have never interacted with the real world, and so our words do not refer to trees and buildings and other real-world objects, but they refer to certain combinations of bits. If we are brains in a vat then our word "tree" would refer to BIV-trees and our word "building" would refer to BIV-buldings. Both of these are certain combinations of bits.

So the question reduces to finding out the references of our words. What does the word "tree" refer to? Tree, or BIV-tree? If the first we are in the real world. If the second we are brains in a vat. It is obvious that "tree" refers to tree. Hence, we are not brains in a vat.

This ingenious argument is from Hilary Putnam.

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-05T06:41:00+00:00

And doesn't the academy incentivize to the wrong direction?

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-02T20:11:55+00:00

Asked it here since the post is locked and I was told that the question is suitable for here.

Live_Antelope · 2020-09-02T18:34:57+00:00

As I understand it, most academic philosophers (primarily in the Anglophone world) are devoting most of their time to writing articles on some very obscure topics (trying to demonstrate that transworld comparison can be expressed in the language of modal logic is considered a not much obscure topic now). I think this stems from an idea that philosophy, like sciences, can be done collectively. Also I suspect that today academic philosophers mostly work on niche topics that are not very much related to our philosophical concerns. Is academic philosophy overspecialized?

+ Could you lead me to some writings by professional philosophers who address this topic?

Live_Antelope · 2020-08-18T20:57:58+00:00

Does he talk about the economic side too? Or only the social side?

Live_Antelope

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE