Jamesian Philosophy Refreshed

In QUORA, I found this question,  What's the historical significance of Peter Abelard’s treatise "Sic et Non," and why is it often translated as "Yes and No"? It is an odd question, worth the expressive tilt of a yorkie's head, since there is nothing ambiguous or difficult about the translation.  "Yes and No" is simply what "Sic et Non" means. I wrote a brief reply while under the impression that the querant who has asked was a confused human being.  I there acknowledged another possible translation, "Thus and Not Thus," but said that was awkward as a matter of idiomatic English. I have since realized that this silly question was from an algorithm, not a confused person.  QUORA relies ever more on unintelligent algorithmically generated "questions" designed to spark controversy and hits.    I will note here, dear human readers, that I was influenced in this answer by the common use of "sic" as a way of ackno...

  There was a lot of speculation, not too long ago, that Justice Alito would be leaving after the end of the October 2025 session of the US Supreme Court. The idea was: (1) that Alito wanted to be replaced by Trump, so he would want to get out while Trump still controlled the Senate and could still secure a younger Alito clone as replacement for the retiring Alito, and (2) that Alito has a new book coming out, October 6th, and he would want to be free to do a book-selling tour at that time.  Of course if Alito is still a Justice as the new October 2026 session goes underway, book selling opportunities will be constrained. So went the speculation.  But when Justices do retire on the basis on such calculations, they generally do so right after the final gavel of the old session falls -- this year, that gavel fell on June 30th.  Yet Alito made no such announcement. Quite the contrary, early this month he told The Wall Street Journal that he is "here for another term." ...

My quote from Brandom about inferentialism earlier this week has me thinking.  Consider the following inference.  If a flower bed contains only geraniums and violas then it contains no roses. This flower bed contains only geraniums and violas. Thus, this flower bed contains no roses.   That seems straightforward although it is more Stoic than Aristotelean, and to some minds the "if ... then" of Stoi logic sounds question begging.  Could we put it in more categorical syllogistic form if we wanted to? I suppose so.  We would want to make explicit the premise that the different types of flowers are mutually exclusive: that is, a geranium is reliably not a rose. Couldn't there be a hybrid?  I have no idea, but I'm presuming any hybrid gera-rose would be neither geranium nor rose. Even with a gera-rose, every flower in this flower bed has been identified as to type, and in each case the type is non-rose.  Reasoning as process of elimination. Just think...

  I turned on CNN on the morning of August 7th.  Yes, I do sometimes get news from the television, rather than the net.  Boomers endure! Anyway: I turned it on and was immediately hit with the release of the July jobs numbers. Dismal.   Of course the administration keeps telling us the economy is great, best ever, and that anything negative anyone might say about the US economy is fake news. Even when their own flunkies provide the numbers. This is from their Bureau of Labor Statistics.    Employment Situation Summary - 2026 M07 Results There is, admittedly, something Orwellian in the wording of the report itself. It says, "Both nonfarm payroll employment (-23,000) and the unemployment rate (4.1 percent) changed little in July."   The number, 23,000 nonfarm jobs lost in one month, is startling.  But it is covered by a soothing word.  That change is "little".  Betweem a bureaucrat's startling numbers and his soothing words -- be...

  As a graduate of Enrico Fermi High School, I see myself  as only one degree of separation away from all things Fermi. Accordingly.... Consider the Fermi paradox. If there are intelligent life forms in this galaxy, aside from those of Earth ... where is everyone?  Why haven't we unequivocally heard from them?  This is NOT a paradox in the traditional sense of the term.  It is simply a question and, given the premises, a good one.  One answer: the universe is actually hostile to the development of intelligent and tech capable life. There is one and only one contrary example because ... miracle. A God who performs miracles.  If you believe that, you have a lot of questions to answer, and I will leave you there.  Supernatural miracles notwithstanding, it seems much more likely there is someone out there.  And this leaves us with the unanswered question. Of course, one answer is that techie civilizations come into existence, yet don't last very ...

  I only quite recently learned a new philosophical word, "inferentialism".  It is the view, especially associated with Robert Brandom, that a concept derives its meaning from its use in a network of inferences, and that accordingly a word or expression has its meaning only because and when users can employ it within such a network. This is a contention within the philosophy of language that has consequences in philosophy of mind and epistemology. That is Brandom above, with a parrot.  A creature that can use lots of words ad phases but has no real skill at inference. If you tell your parrot "it is raining today," he may or may not pick it up and say back to you "it is raining today." He will surely not say, "so you better be careful when you go for a drive tomorrow on those wet roads."    Importantly, this is a non-representational theory.  The phrase "it is raining" does not derive its meaning from the drops of hydrogen bonded with ox...