Formal Logic, Logic Terms
Get flash to fully experience Pearltrees
Mereological essentialism
Mereological essentialism is a philosophical thesis about the relationship between wholes and its parts, and the conditions for their persistence. It holds the view that objects have their parts essentially, implying that if an object were to lose or gain a part, it would cease to exist—that is, it would no longer be the original object but a new, different one. [ edit ] Definition The above statement of mereological essentialism requires some elaboration.
Haecceity ( pron.: / h ɛ k ˈ s iː ɪ t ɪ / ; from the Latin haecceitas , which translates as "thisness") is a term from medieval philosophy first coined by Duns Scotus which denotes the discrete qualities, properties or characteristics of a thing which make it a particular thing. Haecceity is a person or object's " thisness ". Charles Sanders Peirce later used the term as a non-descriptive reference to an individual. [ edit ] Haecceity and quiddity Haecceity may be defined in some dictionaries as simply the "essence" of a thing, or as a simple synonym for quiddity or hypokeimenon .
Haecceity
Ship of Theseus
The ship of Theseus , also known as Theseus' paradox , is a paradox that raises the question of whether an object which has had all its component parts replaced remains fundamentally the same object . The paradox is most notably recorded by Plutarch in Life of Theseus from the late 1st century. Plutarch asked whether a ship which was restored by replacing all its wooden parts, remained the same ship. The paradox had been discussed by more ancient philosophers such as Heraclitus , Socrates , and Plato prior to Plutarch's writings; and more recently by Thomas Hobbes and John Locke .
Nihilism
Nihilism ( pron.: / ˈ n aɪ . ɨ l ɪ z əm / or / ˈ n iː . ɨ l ɪ z əm / ; from the Latin nihil , nothing) is the philosophical doctrine suggesting the negation of one or more putatively meaningful aspects of life . Most commonly, nihilism is presented in the form of existential nihilism , which argues that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value . [ 1 ] Moral nihilists assert that morality does not inherently exist, and that any established moral values are abstractly contrived. Nihilism can also take epistemological or metaphysical / ontological forms, meaning respectively that, in some aspect, knowledge is not possible, or that reality does not actually exist.Purpose
Intention is an agent 's specific purpose in performing an action or series of actions, the end or goal that is aimed at. Outcomes that are not anticipated and not foreseen are known as unintended consequences . Intentional behavior can also be just thoughtful and deliberate goal-directedness. Recent research in experimental philosophy has shown that other factors may also matter for whether or not an action is counted as intentional.
Śūnyatā , (Sanskrit, also shunyata ; Pali: suññatā ), in Buddhism , translated into English as emptiness , openness , thusness , refers to the absence of inherent existence in all phenomena, and it is complementary to the Buddhist concepts of not-self (Pāli: anatta , Sanskrit: anātman ) [ note 1 ] and dependent origination . The exact definition of emptiness varies from one Buddhist tradition to another. [ edit ] Etymology " Śūnyatā " ( Sanskrit noun from the adj. śūnya : "zero, nothing") is usually translated as "emptiness".
Śūnyatā
" Three men make a tiger " ( Chinese : 三人成虎 ; pinyin : sān rén chéng hǔ ) is a Chinese proverb or chengyu (four-character idiom). Three men make a tiger refers to an individual's tendency to accept absurd information as long as it is repeated by enough people. It refers to the idea that if an unfounded premise or urban legend is mentioned and repeated by many individuals, the premise will be erroneously accepted as the truth. This concept is analogous to communal reinforcement or the fallacy of argumentum ad populum . [ edit ] Origin
Three men make a tiger
Sorites paradox
The sorites paradox (sometimes translated as the paradox of the heap because in Ancient Greek : σωρίτης sōritēs means "heaped up") is a paradox that arises from vague predicates . [ 1 ] A typical formulation involves a heap of sand , from which grains are individually removed. Under the assumption that removing a single grain does not turn a heap into a non-heap, the paradox is to consider what happens when the process is repeated enough times: is a single remaining grain still a heap? (Or are even no grains at all a heap?)