[Wittrs] An Issue Worth Focusing On
- From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 07:21:04 -0400
Stuart,
I don't have time to reply to all of the points made in this long post;
so, for now, I'll just focus on one example of conducting philosophical
inquiry as if it were a game of three card monte.
to extend the metaphor used previously, the point to remember is that,
while identicality is a two way street and constitution is a one way
street, one way streets often come in pairs. a city that has a one-way
east-bound street will often have a one-way west-bound street very close
by.
having a pair of one-way streets going in opposite directions is not the
same as having a two way street.
SWM wrote:
>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>SWM wrote:
>>>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>>>so, let's just informally define 'constitutes' as 'counts as'.
>>>Then you are defining it as identity rather than as causal.
>>well, thank you for admitting that I'm not defining 'constitution' as
>>'causation' (in the narrow sense); but, you are still conflating
>>constitution and identity.
>My point is that "constitution" can be read as either a causal or an
>identity claim.
my point is that I'm not writing 'constitution' when I mean identity;
so, if you are reading it that way, you are seeing the bat you put in
the inkblot.
>>identicality is a two way street. the morning star is the evening star
>>and the evening star is the morning star.
>>constitution can be a one way street. electrical phenomena constitutes
>>lightning; but, lightning does not constitute electrical phenomena.
>>there is still a class/subclass relation there.
>In your example immediately above you make an odd mistake in that you
>confuse reference to a specific phenomenon with reference to its
>general form (as you call it, its "class").
no. I am distinguishing between the class and the subclass. try to
remember that I'm *contesting* your claim that, when I suggested
defining 'constitutes' as 'counts as', I was "defining it as identity".
>Insofar as lightning is an example of AN electrical phenomenon, it is
>NOT equivalent to the general class of electrical phenomena because
>"electrical phenomena" covers many more things than just lightning.
precisely, they are not identical. lightning is the subclass. electrical
phenomena is the superclass. the two classes are not co-extensive.
>Thus it would be correct to say that lightning is an electrical
>phenomenon but not, as you do, that "electrical phenomena constitutes
>lightning" since such phenomena can be any number of other things
>including static electricity causing one's hair to frizz up, the
>activity asscoicated with closing a closed circuit, the transfer of
>information between individual brain cells, etc., etc.
>Since all are "electrical phenomena" one could not say, as you do, that
>"electrical phenomena constitute(s) lightning".
using the definition of 'constitutes' as 'counts as' one could very well
say lightning constitutes electrical phenomena; precisely because, as
you say "lightning is an example of AN electrical phenomenon".
and that refutes your claim that by defining 'constitutes' as 'counts
as', I was "defining it as identity".
that said, I'd also point out that the other use of 'constitutes'
employed above is also a one way street; although, it obviously goes in
the other direction.
constitution can also mean 'composed of'. the examples you culled from
online dictionaries includes "Copper and tin constitute bronze". that's
a legitimate use; but, it is only a one-way relation. you can't say that
bronze constitutes copper or tin.
there is a sense in which electrical phenomena constitutes lightning
because one can say that lightning is nothing more than electrical
phenomena. it's legitimate to say lightning is constituted by electrical
phenomena and nothing more. indeed, that usage is precisely what is
known as the is of constitution.
Joe
--
Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
==========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
