找回密码
 注册
搜索
热搜: 超星 读书 找书
查看: 19|回复: 10

[【读书进行时】] 准备把斯坦福哲学百科全书读一遍,开个贴当记录

[复制链接]
发表于 昨天 20:59 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
用了人工智能这些文章就相对容易读了,前面几个条目我看过了,第一次标记
Himelright, Jack, 2023, “A Lewisian Argument Against Platonism, or Why Theses About Abstract Objects Are Unintelligible,” Erkenntnis, 88(7): 3037–3057. doi:10.1007/s10670-021-00489-4.x

出自:https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abstract-objects/
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 昨天 21:10 | 显示全部楼层
However, there are deflationist proposals that run counter to Carnap’s approach, among them, deflationary nominalism (Azzouni 2010) or agnosticism about abstract objects (Bueno 2008a, 2008b, 2020). Additionally, philosophers inspired by Frege’s work have argued for a minimal notion of an object (Rayo 2013, Rayo 2020 [Other Internet Resources]; and Linnebo 2018).
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 昨天 21:10 | 显示全部楼层
For additional discussion about the basic positions in the debate about abstract and concrete objects, see Szabó 2003
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 昨天 21:17 | 显示全部楼层
For example, Benacerraf concluded that “numbers are not objects at all, because in giving the properties (that is, necessary and sufficient) of numbers you merely characterize an abstract structure—and the distinction lies in the fact that the ‘elements’ of the structure have no properties other than those relating them to other ‘elements’ of the same structure” (1965, 70).
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 昨天 21:23 | 显示全部楼层
Though attempts have been made to investigate abstraction principles for sets (Cook 2003), it remains an open question whether something like the mathematical concept of a set can be characterized by a suitably restricted abstraction principle. (See Burgess 2005 for a survey of recent efforts in this direction.)
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 昨天 23:09 | 显示全部楼层
For the relevant notion of essence, see Fine 1994.
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 昨天 23:29 | 显示全部楼层
See Swoyer 2007 and Cowling 2017 for further discussion of abstract and concrete entities.
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 昨天 23:29 | 显示全部楼层
See Dumsday 2022 for reasons to doubt not only the exhaustive but also the (disjunctively) exclusive character of the distinction).
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 5 小时前 | 显示全部楼层
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/action/notes.html#note-1

Our focus will be on individual human action. Readers interested in joint action should consult Roth (2017) and Schweikard and Schmid (2021). We similarly defer on the topic of free will to O’Connor and Franklin (2022).
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 5 小时前 | 显示全部楼层
surprising scientific results continue to challenge commonly held views in philosophy of action (see e.g. Wegner 2002 and Nahmias 2014 for critical discussion of recent findings).
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 4 小时前 | 显示全部楼层
For more on these different approaches to intention, see Setiya 2022.
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|网上读书园地

GMT+8, 2026-2-28 06:35 , Processed in 0.090579 second(s), 4 queries , Redis On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.5

© 2001-2025 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表