SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: koan who wrote (9220)4/17/2006 11:34:46 AM
From: koan  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 78416
 
4 down!!

John Duns Scotus (1265/66-1308) was one of the most important and influential philosopher-theologians of the High Middle Ages. His brilliantly complex and nuanced thought, which earned him the nickname "the Subtle Doctor," left a mark on discussions of such disparate topics as the semantics of religious language, the problem of universals, divine illumination, and the nature of human freedom. This essay first lays out what is known about Scotus's life and the dating of his works. It then offers an overview of some of his key positions in four main areas of philosophy: natural theology, metaphysics, the theory of knowledge, and ethics and moral psychology.
1. Life and Works



To: koan who wrote (9220)4/17/2006 8:28:57 PM
From: E. Charters  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 78416
 
Ockham divined the basic principle of justifiable causation, that arbitrary reasons may be eschewed, as that which could cause a phenomenon were not necessary to entertain, so much as things which were the inescapable cause.

This principle of parsimony is one of the great drivers of scientific investigation today, and the most quoted perhaps of the basic principles or philosophies of science and legal investigation. It is also known as the law of dualities, the theory of little green men, etc.. It can be restated in many ways. It could be called the law of evidence, the law of necessity or the law of multiple causation. Nothing which is not in evidence as having cause must be surmised because it could cause.

This leads to a difficulty in justifying proposed causation as in theories that are developed, or evidence that is searched for. In other words, pure deduction, rather than induction. The relief from this is to seek that which is necessary and to reject the unnecessary or duplicitous. Generalities must be sought that are concluded as the sole generator of the effect, and the necessarily sole generator. Looking for evidence not found so far is fine, but looking for cause where no evidence can be found for it, is not.

Such a philosophy rejects or advise caution in acceptance mere multi-factorial excuses for ignorance of causation. When looking for cause of cancer, heart disease and obesity in populations, the quite possible driver of modern changes to basic nutrition, is rejected by people who say the cause is multi-factorial and thus extremely difficult to track. In devising a basis for investigation, one might look to things which cause changes to body chemistry which have had changes in toxicity themselves -- and in that line of reasoning the best place to look is in what nourishes the cells that itself may be increased in toxicity. Food? Who woulda thot? This approach of simplicity does not reject other factors but asks for their explicit connection that shows a chain of evidence.

EC<:-}