Armstrong on Quantities and Resemblance

Resemblances obtain not only between objects but between properties. Resemblances of the latter sort – in particular resemblances between quantitative properties – prove to be the downfall of a well-known theory of universals, namely the one presented by David Armstrong. This paper examines Armstrong’s efforts to account for such resemblances within the framework of his theory and also explores several extensions of that theory. All of them fail.     

Armstrong on Probabilistic Laws of Nature

D. M. Armstrong famously claims that deterministic laws of nature are contingent relations between universals and that his account can also be straightforwardly extended to irreducibly probabilistic laws of nature. For the most part, philosophers have neglected to scrutinize Armstrong’s account of probabilistic laws. This is surprising precisely because his own claims about probabilistic laws make it unclear just what he takes them to be. We offer three interpretations of what Armstrong-style probabilistic laws are, and argue that all three interpretations are incompatible either with some feature of Armstrong’s broader metaphysics or with essential features of his account of laws (or both).     

Armstrong on classes as states of affairs

Book Information Culture and Enlightenment: Essays for Gyorgy Markus. Culture and Enlightenment: Essays for Gyorgy Markus John Grumley, Paul Crittenden, and Pauline Johnson, eds., Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2002, pp. vii + 339, £47.50 (cloth). Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing. Pp. vii + 339. £47.50 (cloth:),     

Armstrong And The Problem Of Converse Relations

In A World of States of Affairs(Cambridge University Press, 1997) David Armstrong offers acomprehensive metaphysics based on the thesis that the world consistsof states of affairs. Among the entities postulated by Armstrong's theory are relations, including non-symmetrical relations, and whileArmstrong does not agree with Russell that all relations have adirection or definite order among their places, he does explicitlyacknowledge that the slots of a non-symmetrical relation have adefinite order or direction. I first show that non-symmetricalrelations pose a problem for Armstrong's theory by raising TheProblem of Converse Relations. I then argue that the bestresolution of this problem in the context of Armstrong's theoryinvolves adopting an analysis of the order or direction of a relationthat differs from the analysis that Russell assumes. I conclude bydiscussing a further problem facing Armstrong's ontology: TheProblem of Converse Relational Properties.     

David and Judith

SUMMARY

This paper begins with a discussion of Dialogicai Psychotherapy-that “healing through meeting” which comes when the relation between therapist and patient is central-and explores inclusion, making present, confirmation, and the “normative limitation of mutuality.” Secondly, it discusses a Dialogicai Psychotherapy particularly important for couples therapy-Ivan Bos-zormenyi-Nagy's Contextual (intergenerational family) Therapy with its emphases on multidirected partiality, trustbuilding, rejunction, and the intergeneration merit ledger. The third part of the paper applies Dialogicai and Contextual therapy to the case of David and Judith, a couple who show clearly the importance of families of origin.     

Armstrong was a Cheat: A Reply to Eric Moore

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we reply to Eric Moore’s argument that Lance Armstrong did not cheat, at least according to one, standard account of cheating. If that is the case, we argue, so much the worse for the standard account of cheating, since Armstrong was a cheat. We argue that the standard account of cheating fails on several counts: it specifies conditions that are not necessary for cheating: that cheating involves trying to secure an unfair advantage and that cheating depends on fair application of the rules. We dispute Moore’s claim that doping in the peloton was a convention that had normative force, and reject his anti-formalist analogy between doping in the peloton and bodily contact in basketball.