[lit-ideas] An Undisposed Fink
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:27:00 EST
In a message dated 11/17/2004 5:32:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Robert.Paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
To say that there are 'non-actualised' dispositions is
just to say that the person who allegedly has such a disposition does not do
x.
(This follows trivially from what it means to say that the disposition is
'non-actualised.') The evidence that such a person has any disposition at all
with regard to x must then lie elsewhere. In the case of persons, our
conceptually primitive psychology prevents of from saying just what such
evidence would be: there is nothing like the molecular structure of fragile
things which can be appealed to here.
-----
Part of the problem concerns what David Lewis has called a 'fink',
dispositions such as they disappear when you most need them. E.g. Patricia may
have a
disposition to sing, but when pressed, she starts to fell indisposed, etc.
Lewis claimed that most dispositions are indeed _finks_ and there's nothing
much you can do about them.
On the other hand, Lady Hampshire (Nancy Cartwright) thought that Sir
Stuart's account of dispositions provides a good framework for the philosophy
of
science. Oddly, Hampshire's point was about dispositions in persons, while
Cartwright's rewrite (available online) is on dispositions in things like the
weather.
Cheers,
JL
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] An Undisposed Fink
