Saunders' recent arguments in favour of the weak discernibility of (certain) quantum particles seem to be grounded in the 'generalist' view that science only provides general descriptions of the worlIn this paper, I introduce the ‘generalist’ perspective and consider its possible justification and philosophical basis; and then look at the notion of weak discernibility. I expand on the criticisms formulated by Hawley (2006) and Dieks and Veerstegh (2008) and explain what I take to be the basic problem: that the properties (...) invoked by Saunders cannot be pointed to as ‘individuators’ of otherwise indiscernible (and thus numerically identical) entities because their ontological status remains underdetermined by the evidence and the established interpretation of the theory. In addition to to this, I suggest that Saunders does not deal adequately with bosons, and cannot do so exactly because he subscribes to PII and the generalist picture. The last part of the paper contains a critical examination of the claim (or at least implicit assumption) that the generalist picture should be regarded as obviously compelling by the modern-day empiricist. (shrink)

Joshua Knobe und andere haben empirische Belege für folgende rätsel- hafte Asymmetrie vorgelegt: Nebenfolgen, die lediglich in Kauf genommen werden, werden im Alltag als unabsichtlich bezeichnet, wenn sie positiv sind, jedoch als absichtlich, wenn sie negativ sind. Ich versuche zu zeigen, dass dieser Asymmetrie ein symmetrisches Prinzip zugrunde liegt, das auf die kausalen Rollen abhebt, die bestimmte Eigenschaften von Akteuren für das Auftreten von Ereignissen spielen. Relevant sind hierbei Kausalrelationen, mit denen gewisse „Spiegelverhältnisse“ einhergehen: im Ereignis „spiegelt“ sich die Akteurseigenschaft (...) evaluativ und propositional. (shrink)

Since Davidson's proposal to use a Tarskian theory of truth in order to develop a theory of meaning has been criticised extensively, it is decisive to ask whether Davidson needs such a theory as an assumption and premise in other parts of his work. Especially, many authors have claimed that Davidson's argument in his paper 'On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme' depends on his approach in the theory of meaning. It is argued that this interpretation is wrong and (...) Davidson's attack on conceptual relativism does not depend in any way on his defense of truth-conditional semantics. Rather Davidson's thoroughgoing holism and the principle of charity are the basic rationale for his denial of conceptual relativism. (shrink)