tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post564238995246679426..comments2024-03-27T15:34:14.749-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: Distinguishing two theses in Anscombe's reply to C. S. LewisVictor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-76425225953780390032021-05-28T20:20:32.686-07:002021-05-28T20:20:32.686-07:00It seems that the naturalism he is addressing is a...It seems that the naturalism he is addressing is a sort of skepticism.<br /><br />Everyone thinks they are freely making decisions, but this sort of naturalist disagrees. The naturalist argues that no, we are not free to make decisions and spends extraordinary energy trying to change your mind.<br /><br />You would see this was a pointless exercise if you truly believed in this sort of naturalism. But throughout history some people like the feeling of being one of those that "knows" what's behind the curtain while the ordinary Joe is clueless. Gnosticism. bmillerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05855545675821692382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-30647847175656533512021-05-27T15:08:33.540-07:002021-05-27T15:08:33.540-07:00There were several points made by Anscombe. One wa...There were several points made by Anscombe. One was a distinction between irrational and nonrational causes. A second concerns the concept of "validity," what does it mean when Lewis uses it. (Surely not deductive validity). When Lewis says reasoning is valid he means it is a legitimate source of discovering the truth. Another, probably Anscombe's main point, is that words like "why," "because," and "explanation," are all ambiguous. They can refer to ground and consequent relations or cause and effect relations. And a "full" explanation of something might satisfy us without excluding other explanations. But Lewis's argument is, at the very least, effective against a belief in what philosophers today would call "the causal closure of the physical." <br /><br />You can get the Anscombe response in the appendices here: <br /><br />http://lewisiana.nl/anscombe/Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-42993735622647526032021-05-26T20:58:03.622-07:002021-05-26T20:58:03.622-07:00Seems to me that Anscombe's whole point was th...Seems to me that Anscombe's whole point was that Lewis used "validity" when he should have used another word.<br /><br />Lewis agreed. A and B are essentially the same aren't they?bmillerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05855545675821692382noreply@blogger.com