Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Omniscience: the ability to know all statements. - Logical problem even the understanding of a logically true statement could could cause the requirement, that all logical consequences are known. E.g. Knowing the calculation rules would logically require that all the results are known._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Bas van Fraassen on Omniscience - Dictionary of Arguments
I 129 Why-question/Fraassen: context-dependent - (> Relevance). Omniscience: an omniscient being does not have an explanation, because there are no why questions for it. If it has no specific interests - because they are for it just as context-dependent as for us - Information: is not by itself an explanation. >Explanation, >Information, >Theories. It has to be screened only by relevance considerations - i.e. an omniscient being cannot use its information if it does not restrict these - screening of information also solves the problem of asymmetry. >Asymmetry. I 134 Explanation: Response to Why-questions. _____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Fr I B. van Fraassen The Scientific Image Oxford 1980 |
||
> Counter arguments against Fraassen
> Counter arguments in relation to Omniscience
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-27