[lit-ideas] Re: Alleged Circularity of Dispositional Analysis
- From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 09:05:53 +0000 (GMT)
--- Robert Paul <Robert.Paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Donal has, I think, misunderstood what I was trying to say in the first
> paragraph of my reply to him earlier.
I don't think so, au contraire etc.
> I wrote:
>
> This is surely wrong [that the evidence that A has a disposition to do x is
> that
> A does x under certain circumstances] because a disposition to do x may be
> non-actualised, so that despite the disposition to do x existing, x is not
> done.
> To say someone has a disposition to do x is therefore not the same as
> saying
> someone has done x.
>
> Donal says that he did not say what is enclosed in square brackets above.
No, Donal says that he did not _deny_ what is enclosed in the square
brackets, contrary to Robert Paul's contrary assertion.
> I
> never thought he did . The bracketed material was a paraphrase of what I
> had
> said earlier and I included it to try to make clear to those whose
> attention
> might have flagged just what he was claiming was 'surely wrong.'
Again, I never claimed this was 'surely wrong' though I have claimed it is
'surely wrong' to suggest otherwise.
Donal
London
___________________________________________________________
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
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] Re: Alleged Circularity of Dispositional Analysis
