Blue Devil Knight on Penelope Maddy's new book
posted by Victor Reppert @ 1:18 PM
3 Comments
Dangerous Idea 2
A blog to discuss the argument from reason.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
About Me
- Name: Victor Reppert
- Location: Glendale, Arizona, United States
I am the author of C. S. Lewis's Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason, published by Inter-Varsity Press. I received a Ph.D in philosophy from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 1989.
Previous Posts
- Does the Argument from Reason commit the fallacy o...
- Am I a weird naturalist?
- Understanding the term "supernatural"
- An attack on Lewis from Austin Cline--redated from...
- Reply to JT Eberhard
- The Richard Carrier Fallacy
- The Unity of Consciousness (again)
- Lycan's four objections to substance dualism
- A formalization of the argument from mental causation
- This is an encyclopedia piece on the philosophy of...
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
3 Comments:
Thanks, Victor.
The book I reviewed, for those who don't click on the title of Victor's post, is called Second Philosophy (obviously a jab at Descartes' First Philosophy).
I got her book after the debate a few posts back on logic. In addition to her methodological views, she has a very interesting perspective on the ontology of logic, different from what I advocate. Hers is obviously more nuanced, educated in the literature, and generally well thought out, even if not necessarily correct.
BDK
I will not have any time soon to read Maddy's book. However, maybe her thought as it specifically relates to the AfR can be summarized. I should be better read on all this than I am, however, I found the following brief exchange on the subject in general to be interesting:
http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/eps/PES-Yearbook/1998/ellett_ericson.html
http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/eps/PES-Yearbook/1998/siegel.html
At the very least it seems to confirm that naturalism and realism regarding logical necessity do not sit well together. Something that our exchange might be taken to illustrate as well.
You would like the book, especially parts I and III. It brings an appropriate level of precision to the discussion. She discusses examples in which (classical) logic will and will not work, that sort of thing. She also has a good deal of interesting psychological data that she brings to bear on the question of the ontogeny of logical thought (and she also relates these psychological structures to the question of the ontology of logical claims, whether they reflect general structures of the world, and if so, how general).
Anyway, you'll like the book. Maddy is good. If I do any more summarizing, review of it, it will be at that other web site.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home