Philosophy Concordance - online philosophical quotations

Many philosophers regard a question of this kind as an ontological question which must be raised and answered before the introduction of the new language forms.

But the question of mind is more difficult, and it is this question that I propose to discuss in these lectures.

The question which of these occurs is not of any importance for the theoretic serviceability of the characteristic in question.

When I ask the question, “How could language have evolved?” I mean something quite different from empirical researchers who ask a different question using the same sentence.

Now she can express her question whether this is ph-red as a question about a contextindependent, objective proposition: is it true that wow = ph-red?

The question whether our minds are instruments of knowledge, and, if so, in what sense, is so vital that any suggested analysis of mind must be examined in relation to this question.

Before we can discuss the answer to this question, we must first be clear as to what our question means.

I propose to treat the question as an engineering or designer question.

The question seems to me the same as the question whether mnemic causation is ultimate, which we considered without deciding in Lecture IV. But I think the bulk of the evidence points to the materialistic answer as the more probable.

But a juster question perhaps arises upon this (if it be not past question), namely, whether this motion (admitting that the earth stands still) is confined to the heavens, and does not rather descend and communicate itself to the air and waters.