Sunday, February 15, 2009

Philosophical Proofs

Let us make the following bold conjecture: p.

It would be nice to have a deductive argument that p from self- evident premises. Unfortunately I am unable to provide one. So I will have to rest content with the following intuitive considerations in its support: p.

Most people find the claim that not-p completely obvious and when I assert p they give me an incredulous stare. But the fact that they find not- p obvious is no argument that it is true; and I do not know how to refute an incredulous stare. Therefore, p.

P-ness is self-presenting. Therefore, p.

If not p, what? q maybe?

Can you name the philosopher to whom each of the above could be attributed?

No comments: