*Wednesday seminar: Josh Parsons (Otago), 3:30 – 5:30 in the Refectory, Main
Quad*

"Command and consequence"

"Attack at dawn if the weather is fine! The weather is fine. Therefore
attack at dawn!" Is this argument valid? Is it an instance of modus ponens?
I outline a semantics of the imperative mood that answers yes to both these
questions while retaining the traditional view that imperatives are neither
truth nor false.



*Foundations WIP seminar: Graham Nerlich (Adelaide), 11:30 – 1:00 in the
Philosophy Common Room*

“Bell’s ‘Lorentzian Pedagogy’ – a bad education”.

Merely that JS Bell wrote “How to teach special relativity” ensures an
interest in the paper. But it has become an icon of a particular philosophy
of special relativity, constructivism, championed mainly by Harvey Brown and
Oliver Pooley. Brown makes the depth of the issues clear “… a moving rod
contracts and a moving clock dilates *because of how it is made up and not
because of the nature of its spatio-temporal environment.* Bell was surely
right.” [his emphasis]. I claim that Bell was surely wrong for largely
philosophical reasons so that Brown, Pooley et al. are confused, too, about
utterly basic issues. A bit of actual physics, about acceleration in SR,
gets into the act as well.
*
*
_______________________________________________
SydPhil mailing list: http://sydphil.info

950 subscribers now served.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, change your MEMBERSHIP OPTIONS, find ANSWERS TO COMMON 
PROBLEMS, or visit our ONLINE ARCHIVES, please go to the LIST INFORMATION PAGE: 
http://sydphil.info

Reply via email to