Lexicon of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute

Complaints - Corrections

Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II


What is wrong?
Other metadata
Excerpt or content

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

Captcha Code-Check*
Captcha Code
Please type the captcha code here.

Bad visibility? generate code again.

The complaint
will not be published.


I 269
Epistemology/Leibniz/Aristotle/Millikan: the dispute between Leibniz and Aristotle reappears at the level of epistemology:
I 270
For example, the assertion "x is red" is equivalent to the assertion "x looks red for a standard observer under standard conditions.
Problem: then follows from "x is not red": "x does not look red for .. under ...".
Ontological/ontology: this corresponds to the fact that non-red would be a void, an absence of red - rather than an opposite of red.
However, it is about that "x is not red" is equivalent to "x does not look red under standard ..." is either empty or false.

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.