Greg Detre
8/3/01
Arthur Eddington � Nature of the Physical World � discussion of time
Evans agrees with Strawson + Kant � we need space
Evans PQ + SQ � cf Locke???
Hero needs pitch recognition, but not perfect pitch
master sound ≈ Doppler effect
does Hero have will, e.g. failures in receptivity?
Hero as a for/backward robot � but that�s adding another dimension
Transcendental Arguments as response to scepticism � condition of having knowledge of an objective world
doesn't help the Cartesian sceptic
is not arguing for an objective world � assuming one
and arguing for our perception of it
let�s say we were using this as an argument for cause
refute Humean sceptic � that causation must be true if there�s an objective world
Berkeley � matter = incoherent notion
need matter (Evans) for grounded sensations
need substrate to make experiences objective (Berlin)
if you�re sitting in an identically but numerically distinct chair then God preserves temporal continuity + objectivity
but without God � can you make sense of it not being the same chair?
same atoms
does this make space a priori?
need space to be rational??? no, need objectivity
needs second dimension � is that necessarily space-like
what is �space-like�???
Strawson doesn't want to make the move that space + time are mind-independent
philosophy = exploring necessary features of our conceptual scheme
Kantian project, without the idealism
red square � blue circle � yelow triangle
what more do you need than regularity?
faith that the red square is always there, even unperceived
Hume says that�s Custom - inadequate
need space for this permanent world
Evans � don�t need master sound, only order + regularity
= quasi-spatial map
then:
space = will + regularity???
space = assumption about what explains the regularity???
or just quantifiable/distanced regularity???
number ≈ form of space??? �/span> geometry???
how important is geometry for Kant???
space as directed/ordered regularity???
space = phenomenologically essential to experience � spatial map has a qualitative character
it�s all about object permanence???
space + time aren't Kant�s only claims like this
space + time aren't categories(???) (substance, cause, negation)
principles � substance is conserved
space + time are non-conceptual/propositional = framework of induction
space + time ≠ �abstract general ideas� like categories
experience doesn't justify (transcendental argument) but originates
what would it take for Hero to think of unperceived sounds???
�/span> objectivity
is the master sound necessary for someone with perfect pitch???
is the master sound about pitch???
could we imagine 2D time without space???
well, you need >1 dimension
causation without space???
how does Strawson define objectivity except as �public�???
creature in a non-space world � objectivity???
could you have the resources for qualitative identification but numeric distinct � need a space-like dimension
cf Hawking 2D insufficient for intestines
2D � sense + choice � need choice for objectivity