Hey, I see that you linked to my blog. (A first for me, besides friends and blog carnivals). I was wondering what it was that you liked about my post. Was it the solution that I offered, or something else? Simply Wittgenstein fandom?
hi Chris, i've just been reading your blog and i found it very interesting.. but there appeared to me some ambiguous issues which arose;
you stated: By showing how we cannot use deductive necessity as a criteria for justification (at the epistemic level), we have eliminated the standard by which induction is considered to be problematic.
This may not be a problem and i might just have the wrong end of the stick; but my question is; is deductive reason or neccessity dependent upon a series of sense impressions? can a notion of neccessity be known apriori? i would be very keen to hear your views; my email is; u4681058@anu.edu.au
Hey, I see that you linked to my blog. (A first for me, besides friends and blog carnivals). I was wondering what it was that you liked about my post. Was it the solution that I offered, or something else? Simply Wittgenstein fandom?
ReplyDeleteThanks!
-Chris
hi Chris, i've just been reading your blog and i found it very interesting.. but there appeared to me some ambiguous issues which arose;
ReplyDeleteyou stated: By showing how we cannot use deductive necessity as a criteria for justification (at the epistemic level), we have eliminated the standard by which induction is considered to be problematic.
This may not be a problem and i might just have the wrong end of the stick; but my question is;
is deductive reason or neccessity dependent upon a series of sense impressions? can a notion of neccessity be known apriori? i would be very keen to hear your views; my email is; u4681058@anu.edu.au