RE: Book reports
November 14, 2019 at 9:51 am
(This post was last modified: November 14, 2019 at 9:52 am by GrandizerII.)
Actually, no, should really reword what I said because it isn't reflected like that in the article (too bad cannot edit previous message). The question being asked ultimately in the article:
Do the regularities observed in nature indicate causality in the objective sense, are they mere regularities, or is there a middle ground between the two that needs to be considered?
The author of the article ultimately makes a case for the third option, thus not denying causality (and therefore not contradicting Aristotelianism necessarily) but nevertheless agreeing with Hume to an extent.
Do the regularities observed in nature indicate causality in the objective sense, are they mere regularities, or is there a middle ground between the two that needs to be considered?
The author of the article ultimately makes a case for the third option, thus not denying causality (and therefore not contradicting Aristotelianism necessarily) but nevertheless agreeing with Hume to an extent.
