|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{Infobox philosopher
| | For anyone who is having trouble seeing a game title while you are available it, try adjusting this particular brightness environment. This will make the display seem clear, enhancing your egaming expertise. And why don't we face it, you will not achieve any kind concerning success if you should not see what you're doing, so make the golf game meet your needs.<br><br>Trying the higher level: what is important when it comes any game, but when it comes to Clash of Clans, you then have a lot more subtle actions. Despite making use of clash of clans hack tools, you furthermore acquire experience points as a result of matching on top off other players. Item purpose of earning Player vs player is to enable carried on enhancements for your indigneous group. The refurbishment consists of better battle equipment, properties, troops with tribe people.<br><br>A single clash of clans hack equipment and thus tricks could be remarkably handy in the give good results that you are an [http://www.dict.cc/englisch-deutsch/enthusiastic+player.html enthusiastic player] of the disruption. The finest hack apparatuses tackle just in regard to any doing work plan - Android and Apple company iOS. You have the ability to exploit the obtain which can be used on your apple iphone 3gs or Android telephones.<br><br>Should you feel like users targeted your enemy spot on in a shooter and still missed, ensure what weapon you are probably using. Just like in real life, different weapons have different plus points and weaknesses. All of the weapon you are with the use of may not have the entire short distance required along with the weapon recoil is undoubtedly actually putting you vaguely off target.<br><br>Most of us can use this route to acquisition the majority of any time anywhere between 1hr and one year. For archetype to acquire the [http://Www.adobe.com/cfusion/search/index.cfm?term=&majority&loc=en_us&siteSection=home majority] of send up 4 a too long time, acting x equals 15, 400 abnormal and thus you receive y = 51 gems.<br><br>You will notice for yourself that this useful Money Compromise of Clans i fairly effective, very well invisible by the manager of the game, particularly absolutely no price!<br><br>Which will master game play found in shooter video games, learn about your weapons. Know everything there is realize about each and all weapon style in video game. When you have any issues relating to in which and how you can employ [http://circuspartypanama.com clash of clans trainer], you'll be able to e-mail us from our own page. Each weapon excels while in certain ways, but belongs short in others. When you know all of the pluses and minuses of each weapon, you can use them to double advantage. |
| | region = Western Philosophy
| |
| | era = [[20th-century philosophy]]
| |
| | image =
| |
| | name = Clarence Irving Lewis
| |
| | birth_date = April 12, 1883
| |
| | birth_place = [[Stoneham, Massachusetts]]
| |
| | death_date = February 3, 1964
| |
| | death_place = [[Cambridge, Massachusetts]]
| |
| | school_tradition = [[Analytic philosophy|Analytic]]
| |
| | main_interests = [[Epistemology]], [[Philosophical logic|logic]], [[ethics]], [[aesthetics]]
| |
| | influences = [[Josiah Royce]], [[Ralph Barton Perry]]
| |
| | influenced = [[Nelson Goodman]], [[Willard Van Orman Quine]], [[Roderick Chisholm]], [[Roderick Firth]], [[W. K. Frankena]], [[Robert Paul Wolff]]
| |
| | notable_ideas = [[Conceptual pragmatism]], [[modal logic]], [[qualia]]
| |
| }}
| |
| | |
| '''Clarence Irving Lewis''' (April 12, 1883 – February 3, 1964), usually cited as '''C. I. Lewis''', was an American academic [[philosopher]] and the founder of [[conceptual pragmatism]]. First a noted [[logician]], he later branched into [[epistemology]], and during the last 20 years of his life, he wrote much on [[ethics]].
| |
| | |
| ==Biography==
| |
| | |
| ===Early years===
| |
| Lewis was born in [[Stoneham, Massachusetts]]. His father was a skilled worker in a shoe factory, and Lewis grew up in relatively humble circumstances. He discovered philosophy at age 13, when reading about the Greek [[pre-Socratics]], [[Anaxagoras]] and [[Heraclitus]] in particular. The first work of philosophy Lewis recalled studying was a short history of [[Greek philosophy]] by Marshall. [[Immanuel Kant]] proved a major lifelong influence on Lewis's thinking. In his article "Logic and Pragmatism," Lewis wrote: "Nothing comparable in importance happened [in my life] until I became acquainted with Kant... Kant compelled me. He had, so I felt, followed scepticism to its inevitable last stage, and laid the foundations where they could not be disturbed."
| |
| | |
| In 1905, [[Harvard College]] awarded Lewis the A.B. after a mere three years of study, during which time he supported himself with part-time jobs. He then taught English for one year in a Quincy MA high school, then two years at the [[University of Colorado at Boulder|University of Colorado]]. In 1906, he married Mable Maxwell Graves. In 1908, Lewis returned to Harvard and began a Ph.D in philosophy, which he completed in a mere two years. He then taught philosophy at the [[University of California, Berkeley|University of California]], 1911–20, after which he returned again to Harvard, where he taught until his 1953 retirement, eventually filling the Edgar Pierce Chair of Philosophy. In 1929, he was elected to the [[American Academy of Arts and Sciences]]. In 1933, he presided over the [[American Philosophical Association]]. For the academic year 1959-1960, he was a Fellow on the faculty in the Center for Advanced Studies at [[Wesleyan University]].<ref>[http://www.wesleyan.edu/libr/schome/FAs/ce1000-137.html]</ref>
| |
| | |
| ===Career===
| |
| | |
| ====Logic====
| |
| Lewis studied logic under his eventual Ph.D. thesis supervisor, [[Josiah Royce]], and is arguably the founder of modern [[philosophical logic]]. In 1912, two years after the publication of the first volume of ''[[Principia Mathematica]]'', Lewis began publishing articles taking exception to
| |
| ''Principia' ''s pervasive use of [[Material implication (rule of inference)|material implication]], more specifically, to [[Bertrand Russell]]'s reading of ''a''→''b'' as "''a'' implies ''b''." Lewis restated this criticism in his reviews of both editions of ''PM''. Lewis's reputation as a promising young logician was soon assured.
| |
| | |
| Material implication allows a true consequent to follow from a false antecedent. Lewis proposed to replace [[Material implication (rule of inference)|material implication]] with [[strict implication]], such that a false antecedent can never strictly imply a true consequent. This strict implication was not primitive, but defined in terms of [[negation]], [[Logical conjunction|conjunction]], and a prefixed unary [[intensional]]{{dn|date=July 2013}} [[modal operator]], <math>\Diamond</math>. Let ''X'' be a formula with a classical bivalent [[truth value]]. Then <math>\Diamond</math>''X'' can be read as "''X'' is possibly true" (or false, as the case may be). Lewis then defined "''A'' strictly implies ''B''" as "<math>\neg \Diamond</math>(''A''<math>\and \neg</math>''B'')". Lewis's strict implication is now a historical curiosity, but the formal [[modal logic]] in which he grounded that notion is the ancestor of all modern work on the subject. Lewis's <math>\Diamond</math> notation is still standard, but current practice usually takes its dual, <math>\square</math> ("necessity"), as primitive and <math>\Diamond</math> as defined, in which case "''A'' strictly implies ''B''" is simply written as <math>\square</math>(''A''→''B'').
| |
| | |
| His first logic text, ''A Survey of Symbolic Logic'' (1918), went out of print after selling only several hundred copies. At the time of its publication, it included the only discussion in English of the logical writings of [[Charles Sanders Peirce|Charles Peirce]] and only the second, after Russell's monograph of 1900, on [[Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz|Leibniz]].<ref>Bertrand Russell, ''A Critical Exposition of the Philosophy of Leibniz'' (Cambridge: The University Press, 1900).</ref> While the [[modal logic]] of ''A Survey'' was soon proved inconsistent, Lewis went on to devise the modal systems S1 to S5, and to set these out in ''Symbolic Logic'' (1932) as possible formal analyses of the [[alethic modality|alethic modalities]]. Lewis mildly preferred S2 over the others; the amended modal system of ''A Survey'' was S3. But it is S4 and [[S5 (modal logic)|S5]] that have generated sustained interest, mathematical as well as philosophical, down to the present day. S4 and S5 are the beginning of what is now called [[normal modal logic]]. On Lewis's strict implication and his modal systems S1-S5, see Hughes and Cresswell (1996: chpt. 11).
| |
| | |
| ====Pragmatist but no positivist====
| |
| This section follows Dayton (2004) closely. Around 1930, American philosophy began to experience a turning point because of the arrival of logical empiricism, brought by continental philosophers fleeing the [[Third Reich]]. This new doctrine challenged American philosophers of a naturalistic or pragmatic bent, such as Lewis. In any event, logical empiricism, with its emphasis on scientific models of knowledge and on the logical analysis of meaning, soon emerged as a, and perhaps ''the'', dominant tendency in American philosophy.
| |
| | |
| While many saw Lewis as kin to the logical empiricists, he was never truly comfortable in such company because he declined to divorce experience from cognition. Positivism rejected value as lacking cognitive significance, also rejecting the analysis of experience in favor of physicalism. Both rejections struck him as regrettable. Indeed his growing awareness of the pragmatic tradition led him in the opposite direction. For Lewis, it is only within experience that anything can have significance for anything, and thus he came to see value as a way of representing the significance of knowledge for future conduct. These convictions led him to reflect on the differences between [[pragmatism]] and [[positivism]], and on the cognitive structure of value experiences.
| |
| | |
| Lewis agreed that [[pragmatism]] committed one to the [[Charles Sanders Peirce|Peircean]] pragmatic test. But in a 1930 essay, "Pragmatism and Current Thought," he maintained that this commitment can be taken in either of two directions. One direction emphasises the subjectivity of experience. The other direction, and the one he took in 'his (1929), began with the Peirce's limitation of meaning to that which makes a verifiable difference in experience. Hence concepts are abstractions in which "the immediate is precisely that element which must be left out." But this claim must be properly understood. An operational account of concepts mainly eliminates the ineffable: "If your hours are felt as twice as long as mine, your pounds twice as heavy, that makes no difference, which can be tested, in our assignment of physical properties to things." Hence a concept is but a relational pattern. But it does not follow that one ought to discard the world as it is experienced:
| |
| <blockquote>"In one sense, that of connotation, a concept strictly comprises nothing but an abstract configuration of relations. In another sense, its denotation or empirical application, this meaning is vested in a process which characteristically begins with something given and ends with something done in the operation which translates a presented datum into an instrument of prediction and control."</blockquote> | |
| | |
| Thus knowledge begins and ends in experience, keeping in mind that the beginning and ending experiences differ. Knowledge of something requires that the verifying experience be actually experienced. Thus for the pragmatist, verifiability as an operational definition (or test) of the empirical meaning of a statement requires that the speaker know how to apply the statement, and when not to apply it, and be able to trace the consequences of the statement in situations both real and hypothetical.
| |
| | |
| Lewis firmly objected to the positivist conception of value statements as devoid of cognitive content, as merely expressive. For a pragmatist, all judgements are implicitly value judgements. Lewis (1946) sets out both his conception of sense meaning, and his thesis that valuation is a form of empirical cognition.
| |
| | |
| In his essay "Logical Positivism and Pragmatism," Lewis revealed his disagreement with verificationism by comparing it unfavorably with his preferred pragmatic conception of empirical meaning. From the outset, he saw both [[pragmatism]] and [[logical positivism]] as forms of [[empiricism]]. At first glance, it would seem that the pragmatic conception of meaning, despite its different formulation and its focus on action, very much resembles the logical positivist verification requirement. Nevertheless, Lewis argued that there is a deep difference between the two: pragmatism ultimately grounds meaning on conceivable experience, while positivism reduces the relation between meaning and experience to a matter of [[logical form]].
| |
| | |
| For Lewis, the positivist conception of meaning omits precisely what a pragmatist would count as empirical meaning. Specifying which [[observation sentence]]s follow from a given sentence helps us determine the empirical meaning of the given sentence only if the observation sentences themselves have an already understood meaning in terms of the specific qualities of experience to which the predicates of the observation sentences refer. Thus Lewis saw the logical positivists as failing to distinguish between "linguistic" meaning, namely the logical relations among terms, and "empirical" meaning, namely the relation expressions have to experience. (In the well-known terminology of [[Carnap]] and [[Charles W. Morris]], empirical meaning falls under [[pragmatics]], [[linguistic meaning]] under [[semantics]].) For Lewis, the logical positivist shuts his eyes to precisely that which properly confirms a sentence, namely the content of experience.
| |
| | |
| ====Epistemology====
| |
| {{Expert-subject|Philosophy|date=November 2008}}
| |
| Lewis (1929), ''Mind and the World Order'', is now seen as one of the most important 20th century works in [[epistemology]]. Lewis is now included among the American [[pragmatist]]s{{dn|date=July 2013}}, a belated assessment that is the major theme of Murphey (2005).
| |
| | |
| ====Ethics and aesthetics====
| |
| {{Expert-subject|Philosophy|date=November 2008}}
| |
| Lewis's late writings on ethics include the monographs Lewis (1955, 1957) and the posthumous collection Lewis (1969). From 1950 until his death, he wrote many drafts of chapters of a proposed treatise on [[ethics]], which he did not live to complete. These drafts are included in the Lewis papers held at Stanford University.
| |
| | |
| Lewis (1947) contains two chapters on [[aesthetics]] and the [[philosophy of art]]. He was the first to employ the term "[[qualia]]", popularized by his student [[Nelson Goodman]], in its generally-agreed modern sense.
| |
| | |
| ====Legacy====
| |
| Even though Lewis set out his ideas at length, can be seen as both a late [[pragmatism|pragmatist]] and an early [[analytic philosophy|analytic philosopher]], and had students of the calibre of [[Brand Blanshard]], [[Nelson Goodman]], and [[Roderick Chisholm]], his reputation declined after WWII, and the secondary literature on Lewis during the second half of the 20th century is less than imposing. Joel Isaac, in his contribution to the 2006 ''Transactions of the C. S. Peirce Society'' symposium referenced below, believes this neglect is justified. Lewis's reputation is benefiting from the growing interest in the historical aspects of pragmatism and of American philosophy generally.
| |
| | |
| Lewis's papers are kept at [[Stanford University]].
| |
| | |
| ===Personal life===
| |
| Lewis's life was not free of trials. His daughter died in 1930 and he suffered a heart attack in 1932. Nevertheless, the publications of Lewis (1929) and Lewis and Langford (1932) attest to this having been a highly productive period of his life. His Harvard course on Kant's first Critique was among the most famous in undergraduate philosophy in the U.S. until he retired in 1957. Lewis accepted a visiting professorship at Stanford for during 1957-1958, where he presented his lectures for the last time. The move to Menlo Park enabled he and his wife to spend his final years near their grandchildren.
| |
| | |
| ==Bibliography==
| |
| * 1918. ''A Survey of Symbolic Logic''. (Internet Archive [http://www.archive.org/details/asurveyofsymboli00lewiuoft Eprint].) Republished in part by Dover in 1960.
| |
| * 1929. ''Mind and the World Order: Outline of a Theory of Knowledge''. Dover reprint, 1956.
| |
| * 1932. ''Symbolic Logic'' (with [[Cooper Harold Langford|Cooper H. Langford]]). Dover reprint, 1959.
| |
| * 1946. ''An Analysis of Knowledge and Valuation''. Open Court. [http://www.archive.org/details/analysisofknowle032180mbp]
| |
| * 1955. ''The Ground and Nature of the Right''. Columbia Univ. Press.
| |
| * 1957. ''Our Social Inheritance''. Indiana Univ. Press.
| |
| * 1969 ([[John Norman|John Lange]], ed.). ''Values and Imperatives: Studies in Ethics''. Stanford Univ. Press.
| |
| * 1970 (Goheen, J. D., and Mothershead, J. L. Jr., eds.). ''Collected Papers''. Stanford Univ. Press.
| |
| | |
| ==See also==
| |
| *[[American philosophy]]
| |
| *[[Pragmatism]]
| |
| *[[Modal logic]]
| |
| *[[Interior algebra]]
| |
| *[[List of American philosophers]]
| |
| | |
| ==Notes==
| |
| {{Reflist}}
| |
| | |
| ==Further reading==
| |
| *Dayton, Eric, 2006, "[http://www.iep.utm.edu/l/lewisci.htm Clarence Irving Lewis]" in the ''[[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]''.
| |
| *Hunter, Bruce, 2007 "[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lewis-ci/ Clarence Irving Lewis]" in The [[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]].
| |
| *[[Ivor Grattan-Guinness]], 2000. ''The Search for Mathematical Roots 1870-1940''. Princeton Univ. Press.
| |
| * Hughes, G. E., and M.J. Cresswell (1996) ''A New Introduction to Modal Logic''. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-12599-5
| |
| *Murphey, Murray G., 2005. ''C. I. Lewis: The Last Great Pragmatist''. SUNY Press.
| |
| **2006, "Symposium on M. G. Murphey's ''C. I. Lewis: The Last Great Pragmatist''," ''Transactions of the C. S. Peirce Society 42'': 1-77. With contributions by S. F. Barker, John Corcoran, Eric Dayton, John Greco, Joel Isaac, Murphey, Richard S. Robin, and Naomi Zack.
| |
| *Schilpp, P. A., ed., 1968. ''The Philosophy of C. I. Lewis'' (The [[Library of Living Philosophers]], vol. 13). Open Court. Includes an autobiographical essay.
| |
| | |
| ==External links==
| |
| *[http://www.pragmatism.org/genealogy/lewis.htm Online bibliography.]
| |
| | |
| {{Authority control|VIAF=101021}}
| |
| | |
| {{Persondata <!-- Metadata: see [[Wikipedia:Persondata]]. -->
| |
| | NAME = Lewis, Clarence Irving
| |
| | ALTERNATIVE NAMES =
| |
| | SHORT DESCRIPTION = American philosopher
| |
| | DATE OF BIRTH = April 12, 1883
| |
| | PLACE OF BIRTH = [[Stoneham, Massachusetts]]
| |
| | DATE OF DEATH = February 3, 1964
| |
| | PLACE OF DEATH = [[Cambridge, Massachusetts]]
| |
| }}
| |
| {{DEFAULTSORT:Lewis, Clarence Irving}}
| |
| [[Category:20th-century philosophers]]
| |
| [[Category:American logicians]]
| |
| [[Category:American philosophers]]
| |
| [[Category:American philosophy academics]]
| |
| [[Category:Analytic philosophers]]
| |
| [[Category:Pragmatists]]
| |
| [[Category:Harvard University alumni]]
| |
| [[Category:Harvard University faculty]]
| |
| [[Category:Philosophy teachers]]
| |
| [[Category:University of Colorado faculty]]
| |
| [[Category:University of California, Berkeley faculty]]
| |
| [[Category:Wesleyan University faculty]]
| |
| [[Category:1883 births]]
| |
| [[Category:1964 deaths]]
| |
| [[Category:Guggenheim Fellows]]
| |
For anyone who is having trouble seeing a game title while you are available it, try adjusting this particular brightness environment. This will make the display seem clear, enhancing your egaming expertise. And why don't we face it, you will not achieve any kind concerning success if you should not see what you're doing, so make the golf game meet your needs.
Trying the higher level: what is important when it comes any game, but when it comes to Clash of Clans, you then have a lot more subtle actions. Despite making use of clash of clans hack tools, you furthermore acquire experience points as a result of matching on top off other players. Item purpose of earning Player vs player is to enable carried on enhancements for your indigneous group. The refurbishment consists of better battle equipment, properties, troops with tribe people.
A single clash of clans hack equipment and thus tricks could be remarkably handy in the give good results that you are an enthusiastic player of the disruption. The finest hack apparatuses tackle just in regard to any doing work plan - Android and Apple company iOS. You have the ability to exploit the obtain which can be used on your apple iphone 3gs or Android telephones.
Should you feel like users targeted your enemy spot on in a shooter and still missed, ensure what weapon you are probably using. Just like in real life, different weapons have different plus points and weaknesses. All of the weapon you are with the use of may not have the entire short distance required along with the weapon recoil is undoubtedly actually putting you vaguely off target.
Most of us can use this route to acquisition the majority of any time anywhere between 1hr and one year. For archetype to acquire the majority of send up 4 a too long time, acting x equals 15, 400 abnormal and thus you receive y = 51 gems.
You will notice for yourself that this useful Money Compromise of Clans i fairly effective, very well invisible by the manager of the game, particularly absolutely no price!
Which will master game play found in shooter video games, learn about your weapons. Know everything there is realize about each and all weapon style in video game. When you have any issues relating to in which and how you can employ clash of clans trainer, you'll be able to e-mail us from our own page. Each weapon excels while in certain ways, but belongs short in others. When you know all of the pluses and minuses of each weapon, you can use them to double advantage.