Lexicon of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
I 253
Drive/Animal/Content/Papineau:
Purpose-Means-thinking/Papineau:
Level 0: "Monomats": Tue V
Level 1: "Opportunists": If B, do V
>Purposes/Papineau.
I 248
Level 2: "people in need": If B and T, do V
Level 3: "Voter": If B1 and T1, do V1, IF T1 is the dominant need
A comparative mechanism is needed here.
Level 4: "Learners": AFTER experience has shown that B1, T1, and V1 result in a reward, then ... (like 3).
>Learning.
Level 2 does not necessarily entail 3. There can be something like Buridan's donkey, which works reliably when only one drive is activated.
>Buridan's donkey.
Level 4: here drives play a further role: they intensify behavior, which lead to the reduction of drives.
>Behavior, >Drives.
I 254
Drive/Content/Papineau: through this complexity, it is uncertain what the exact content is, which the drives represent.
A) Should it consist in the specific results?
B) or in the different effects? Papineau pro b).
>Thinking, >Animals, cf. >Animal language.

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.