Antirealism and reference: Philosophy Forums

Antirealism and reference

YadaYada
fool

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Location: in the past

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 316

Posted 05/17/09 - 12:59 AM: Subject: Antirealism and reference	#1
Prof. Chalmers, 1. Do I misunderstand your position if I characterize it as ontological neutral monism which gives rise to at least both mental and material manifestations? 2. Would the presence of the observer in a relatively stable evolving universe give rise to many possible metaphysics? 3. Would you expect that antirealism might be able to resolve a number of paradoxes in monolithic Aristotelean realism, such as those of universals with displaced (in this instance, chemical) references like "water is H2O", and non-equivalent identities like "Hesperus is Phosphorus"?
{}{}{}{ . . . }{}{}{ . . . }{}{}{}{}{ . . . We may assume the superiority ceteris paribus of the demonstration which derives from fewer postulates ~ Aristotle

davidchalmers
Aspirant

Usergroup: Guest Speakers
Joined: May 09, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 27

Posted 05/17/09 - 05:57 PM:	#2
1. One view that I like, Russellian type-F monism (see "Consciousness and its Place in Nature") can be seen as a sort of neutral monism. Other views that I like (type-D and type-E) are closer to a sort of dualism. 2. Perhaps many possible metaphysics (metaphysicses?), but only one actual metaphysics! Apart from the basic issues re materialism, dualism, etc as above, the role of the observer in quantum mechanics yields various possible metaphysical views -- but I'm inclined to think that only one can be right. 3. I'm not sure what sort of anti-realism you mean here, or what the paradoxes are, or how it would resolve them. So I'm probably not the best person to answer this question! Edited by davidchalmers on 05/17/09 - 06:12 PM

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.