How to Defeat Wüthrich’s Abysmal Embarrassment Argument against Space-Time Structuralism
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Structuralism and the Indispensability Argument
I distill the indispensability argument to four general charateristics, which yield six unfortunate consequences, unwelcome characteristics of the objects yielded by the argument. The indispensabilist’s objects are not mathematical, in any traditional sense, but merely empirical posits. Then, I characterize a form of structuralism in the philosophy of mathematics which relies on an indispensabi...
متن کاملLearning from cancer how to defeat bacteria.
Bacteria Strike Back A rich variety of microorganisms are found in soil. Life in this highly competitive habitat involves both cooperative and antagonistic interactions between species. Over the course of evolution, soil bacteria have developed sophisticated strategies using a wide variety of chemical weapons to survive. These toxins provide rich sources of potential antibiotics, as well as sca...
متن کاملHow Structuralism Can Solve the ‘Access’ Problem1
According to mathematical structuralism, the subject matter of mathematics is not the study of mathematical objects, but of mathematical structures. By moving away from objects, the structuralist claims to be in a position to solve the ‘access’ problem: structuralism explains the possibility of mathematical knowledge without requiring any access to mathematical objects. Fraser MacBride has chal...
متن کاملA Self-Defeat Problem for the Rhetorical Theory of Argument
The rhetorical theory of argument, if held as the conclusion of an argument, is self-defeating. There are two arguments that it is. First is the quick and dirty argument: the rhetorical theory is that argument quality is adjudged by eliciting conviction, but the case for the theory is not convincing. Second is the process argument: if one has the view that one’s reasons are arranged with the so...
متن کاملArguments and Defeat in Argument-Based Nonmonotonic Reasoning
Argument-based formalisms are gaining popularity as models of nonmonotonic reasoning. Central in such formalisms is a notion of argument. Arguments are formal reconstructions of how a conclusion is supported. Generally, an argument is defeasible. This means that an argument supporting a conclusion does not always justify its conclusion: the argument can be defeated. Whether a conclusion support...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Philosophy of Science
سال: 2011
ISSN: 0031-8248,1539-767X
DOI: 10.1086/662634