Titlebook: Dependencies, Connections, and Other Relations; A Theory of Mental C Wim Muijnck Book 2003 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2003 15th c

arsenal

Fallibility

Getting Events Wrongussion of events, in the present chapter, by rejecting two event conceptions. The first one is that of events as having a spatiotemporal mereology, a bit like objects. The second, to which I will dedicate the most effort, is Davidson’s conception of events as concrete entities. In the next chapter I will outline what seems to me the correct view.

令人不快

Book 2003t first think ofsomething like bending spoons by ‘psychic‘ powers. But no, we are dealing here with something much more puzzling: doing things for reasons, i. e. , what we call agency. Psychic spoon-bending would be a fairly straightforward issue. You just exert some psychic force and bend a spoon,

暖昧關(guān)系

HAIL

Particulars, Properties, and Relationsrequired, as we will see later on. I have to skip issues about propositions, numbers, facts, or negative and disjunctive items; I will not treat these as particulars, but apart from noting that they do not seem to occupy specific space-time regions, I have no heavy-weight arguments concerning them on offer.

arbovirus

A Duality in the Concept of CausalityAll very obvious, but only to those who already understand what causing is. But now try to explain what causality, or causation, is in terms that do not appeal to such understanding! Anscombe (1971, 93) claims that

obnoxious

Causal Connectionsal dependence and collateral effects, the near-consensus that immediate action at a distance is impossible, or the assumption that cause and effect must be ‘distinct existences.’ But what is the missing element?

我不明白

The Problem of Causal Relatacounterfactual dependence involving mental states as well as of physical connection involving a minded actor. But physical connections are indeed just that: physical. As far as causal connections are concerned, the only relevant properties will be physical-nomic, not mental ones. I came across this passage about G?del, the mathematician: