Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Ginsborg's partial reductionism faces the same challenges... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→There is little reason to prefer Ginsborg's partial reductionism over non-reductionism or reductionism

    Ginsborg's partial reductionism faces the same challenges raised against non-reductionism and reductionism

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    There is little reason to prefer Ginsborg's partial reductionism over non-reduct...

    Similar

    There is little reason to prefer Ginsborg's partial reductionism over ...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    89%
    At least one crucial aspect of Kelsen's anti-reductionism is questiona...82%
    Multiple realization can be adequately addressed within a reductionist...81%
    The Nagel model of reduction can be refined to retain its spirit while...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: meaning-normativity
    View source passageHide passage
    Miller (2019) and Sorgiovanni (2018) also raise concerns about the viability of Ginsborg’s “primitive” rule-following. In particular, Miller (2019) points out that her argument for why rules do not guide agents, is based on the (mistaken, and disproven by Wittgenstein himself) assumption that being guided by a rule necessarily requires interpreting that rule (2019: 746).[41] What’s more, Miller takes issue with her primitive normativity by claiming that the attitude of “taking-to-be-appropriat

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective