August 20, 2007
Armstrong on Berkeley
I was looking on half.com recently to see if I could find an affordable volume containing Berkeley's
Siris last week when I came upon
this 1965 collection,
Berkeley's Philosophical Writings (ISBN 0020641702 according to half.com; it's apparently too old to have an ISBN printed in it) edited and with introduction by none other than D. M. Armstrong. I was unable to find any further information on the book, but, at half.com prices, decided it was worth buying just to get Armstrong's introduction (and on the off-chance that it contained
Siris). Since there was no information on this book available online, and there are more copies still available, I thought I should provide some information myself...
Continue reading "Armstrong on Berkeley"
March 26, 2007
The Conjunction of the Armstrong-Laws is God
D. M. Armstrong is the best known proponent of a currently quite popular understanding of natural laws. Laws so understood are, as a result, called Armstrong-Laws, or A-Laws for short. These are distinguished from L-Laws, named for David Lewis. L-laws are identical to regularities in events (but not all regularities are laws). Unlike L-Laws, A-Laws are actual metaphysical entities, which exist independently of their instances. That is, according to this theory, the Law of Universal Gravitation is a thing out there in the universe (not in the mind) which actually makes massive objects move toward one another. The attraction (no...
Continue reading "The Conjunction of the Armstrong-Laws is God"
February 3, 2007
No Such Thing as an Ontological Free Lunch
In D.M. Armstrong's book
Universals: an Opinionated Introduction, he discusses the pros and cons of a number of theories of the metaphysics of properties. Chapter three deals with "resemblance nominalism." According to resemblance nominalism, properties can be accounted for in terms of degrees of resemblance between the various objects having the property. So, for instance, on object is red if and only if it resembles some paradigmatic red objects. This theory is plagued by the "Resemblance Regress." Armstrong quotes Bertrand Russells' version as the "classical exposition" of the difficulty (p. 53): If we wish to avoid the universals...
Continue reading "No Such Thing as an Ontological Free Lunch"