For a philosopher with an abiding interest in the nature of objective knowledge systems in science, what could be more important than trying to think in terms of those very subjects of such knowledge to which men like Galileo, Newton, Max Planck, Einstein and others devoted their entire lifetimes? Read more Please choose whether or not you want other users to be able to see on your profile that this library is a favorite of yours. Finding libraries that hold this item You may have already requested this item. Please select Ok if you would like to proceed with this request anyway.
Quantifier Variance and Realism: Essays in Metaontology
Paul Feyerabend (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Sign in Create an account. Syntax Advanced Search. Variance Theses in Ontology and Metaethics Download. Matti Eklund. Matti Eklund Uppsala University.
Factors to Be Considered While Writing a Variance Report
The major contribution of the Nyaya system is its working out in profound detail the means of knowledge known as inference see anumana. Like the other systems, Nyaya is both philosophical and religious. Its ultimate concern is to bring an end to human suffering, which results from ignorance of reality.
In the case of the endurantist and the perdurantist, Hirsch claims that the dispute is merely verbal because the disputants are using alternative languages, the notion of expressing the same claims by use of different sentences. He does so by presenting a dispute between those who think vegetables have sensations and those who do not think vegetables have sensations, a dispute he claims that everyone except verificationists - those who believe that the meaning of a sentence is the sensory experience associated with the appropriate use of that sentence - concede is substantive. Hawthorne charitably interprets Hirsch as not being a verificationist, however, using behavior as the criteria, he is unable to justify how the vegetable dispute could be believed substantive while the persistence dispute not substantive, given that both seem to be lacking differences in behavior. He argues that there can be instances of substantial disputes where there are no big differences in non-linguistic behavior, as well as cases where there are big differences in behavior and no substantial dispute. Similar to Hawthorne, Sider does not believe that behavior is a good criterion for determining substance in ontological disputes.