Re: Physics and philosophy
From: robert j. kolker (nowhere_at_nowhere.net)
Date: 12/10/04
- Next message: Pmb: "Re: Only some energy has mass?"
- Previous message: Andy Resnick: "Re: Why aren't they repairing Hubble?"
- In reply to: Andy Resnick: "Re: Physics and philosophy"
- Next in thread: Andy Resnick: "Re: Physics and philosophy"
- Reply: Andy Resnick: "Re: Physics and philosophy"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 09:20:07 -0500
Andy Resnick wrote:
>
> As I understand it, philosophy changed radically after Locke. Once
> Locke showed (quite conclusively) that causality cannot be derived from
> a more fundamental principle,
Lock or Hume? Hume showed that the notion of causality was empirical and
not a priori. Can you cite the part of Locke you are referring to?
You observation is correct. In English speaking countries interest in
extensive metaphysical systems declined markedly post-Hume. The emphasis
has been on epistemology, ethics, politics and psychology.
Kant, in response to Hume's skeptical arguments pretty well put a stake
through the heart of metaphysics as practiced by Aristotle and Plato.
Bob Kolker
- Next message: Pmb: "Re: Only some energy has mass?"
- Previous message: Andy Resnick: "Re: Why aren't they repairing Hubble?"
- In reply to: Andy Resnick: "Re: Physics and philosophy"
- Next in thread: Andy Resnick: "Re: Physics and philosophy"
- Reply: Andy Resnick: "Re: Physics and philosophy"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|