<!DOCTYPE html><HTML lang="en"> <head><meta charset="utf-8"> <title>Thought Experiments (Sorensen (Roy)) - Theo Todman's Book Collection (Book-Paper Abstracts)</title> <link href="../../../TheosStyle.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"><link rel="shortcut icon" href="../../../TT_ICO.png" /> </head> <a name="Top"></a> <BODY> <div id="header"> <HR><H1>Theo Todman's Book Collection (Book-Paper Abstracts)</H1></div> <hr><CENTER><TABLE class = "Bridge" WIDTH=950><tr><td colspan =3><A HREF = "../BookSummary_1358.htm">Thought Experiments</A></td></tr><tr><td colspan =3><A HREF = "../../../Authors/S/Author_Sorensen (Roy).htm">Sorensen (Roy)</a></td></tr><tr><td colspan =3>This Page provides (where held) the <b>Abstract</b> of the above <b>Book</b> and those of all the <b>Papers</b> contained in it.</td></tr><tr><td><A HREF="#ColourConventions">Text Colour-Conventions</a></td><td><A HREF = "../BookCitings_1358.htm">Books / Papers Citing this Book</A></td><td><A HREF = "../BooksToNotes_1358.htm">Notes Citing this Book</A></td></tr></tr></TABLE></CENTER><hr> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>BOOK ABSTRACT: </B><BR><BR><u>Amazon Book Description</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>In this book, Roy Sorensen presents the first general theory of the <a name="1"></a><A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>1</SUP>. </li><li>He analyses a wide variety of <a name="2"></a><A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>2</SUP>, ranging from aesthetics to zoology, and explores what <a name="3"></a><A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>3</SUP> are, how they work, and what their positive and negative aspects are. </li><li>Sorensen also sets his theory within an evolutionary framework and integrates recent advances in experimental psychology and the history of science.</li></ol> </FONT><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><B>BOOK COMMENT: </B><BR><BR>Photocopy of complete book; Filed in <a name="4"></a>"<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Introduction<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Full <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5520_1">Text</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5520_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>This book presents a general theory of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>2</SUP>: what they are; how they work; their virtues and vices. Since my aim is synoptic, a wide corpus of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>3</SUP> has been incorporated. There is a special abundance of examples from ethics and the metaphysics of personal identity because <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>4</SUP> in these areas have recently attracted heavy commentary. But the emphasis is on variety, rather than quantity. Thus, the discussion ranges over <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>5</SUP> from many disparate fields, from aesthetics to zoology. </li><li>Scientific <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>6</SUP>  especially those in physics  are the clear cases, so my primary goal is to establish true and interesting generalizations about them. Success here will radiate to my secondary goal of understanding philosophical <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>7</SUP>. The reason for this optimism is subscription to a gradualistic metaphilosophy: philosophy differs from science in degree, not kind. Understand science, understand the parameters to be varied, and you understand philosophy. </li><li>My basic means of reaching these two goals is to let the surface grammar of '<A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>8</SUP>' be my guide and to pitch this book as part of the growing literature on <em>experiment</em>. Philosophers and historians of science have long followed the elder statesmen of science in concentrating on theory; experimentation has been dismissed as a rather straightforward matter of following directions and looking at gauges. Within the last ten years, the "just look and see" picture has been rejected in favor of one that assigns deeper roles for experimenters: creating and stabilizing phenomena; atheoretical exploration; and defining concepts by immersion in laboratory practice. Sympathy with this movement, coupled with the belief that <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>9</SUP> are experiments, led me to suspect a corresponding oversimplification of the <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experimenter</A><SUP>10</SUP>'s role. </li><li>The main theme of this book is that <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>11</SUP> is experiment (albeit a limiting case of it), so that the lessons learned about experimentation carry over to <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>12</SUP>, and vice versa. For the symmetry of 'similar' underwrites a two-way trade; if <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>13</SUP> are surprisingly similar to experiments, then experiments are surprisingly similar to <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>14</SUP>. In particular, experiments exploit many of the organizational effects associated with the products of armchair inquiry. Study of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>15</SUP> draws attention to these neglected features of ordinary experiments; for when we explain the informativeness of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>16</SUP>, we cannot appeal to the inflow of fresh information. We are forced to look for ways that old information can be rendered more informative. (Consider how nineteenth-century investigations into animal behavior illuminated human psychology just because researchers had to make do with behavior; the distraction of introspection was removed.) Once these repackaging effects are detected with <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>17</SUP>, they can be spotted in ordinary experiments. However, most of the illumination will flow from ordinary experiment to <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>18</SUP>; I shall mainly use the familiar to explain the obscure. </li><li>Chapter 1 ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5521.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Our Most Curious Device</A>") motivates the study of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>19</SUP>  in broad strokes. Detailed structuring of the issues begins by making chapter 2 ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5522.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Scepticism About Thought Experiments</A>") a forum for sceptics. Thus, the technique looks discredited by the time sceptics yield the floor to Ernst Mach in chapter 3 ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5523.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Mach and Inner Cognitive Africa</A>"). This criticism is followed by a chapter ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5524.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - The Wonder of Armchair Inquiry</A>") on armchair inquiry which will give us more breadth. </li><li>Special use will be made of the cleansing model of armchair inquiry. It presents intellectual improvement as the shedding of intellectual vices, rather than the acquisition of virtues. Rationality is portrayed as analogous to health: just as health is the absence of disease, rationality is the absence of irrationalities. Thus, <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>20</SUP> make us more rational by purging us of bias, circularity, dogmatism, and other cognitive inefficiencies. All experiments work by raising the experimenter's status as an epistemic authority. Ordinary experiments confer authority mainly by improving the experimenter's perceptual abilities and opportunities. <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought experiments</A><SUP>21</SUP> focus on nonperceptual improvements. But since an ordinary experiment can simultaneously provide perceptual and nonperceptual improvements, study of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>22</SUP> can bring a neglected side of ordinary experiments into sharp relief. </li><li>Inconsistency is the most general and best understood of cognitive flaws. This invites a reduction thesis: all of the irrationalities eliminated by <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>23</SUP> can be formulated as inconsistencies. If this thesis is true (and I think it is), we need only standardize the format of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>24</SUP> in order to apply standard logic directly. So while granting that all of the models of armchair inquiry have something to offer, I close the chapter with the conclusion that the reductionist version of the cleansing model offers the best chance for immediate elaboration. </li><li>Thomas Kuhn argued that <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>25</SUP> revealed a special kind of contradiction  a type of local incoherency. I try to salvage the insight driving Kuhn's heresy in chapter 5 ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5525.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Kuhntradictions</A>"). A paradox is a small set of individually plausible yet jointly inconsistent propositions. In chapter 6 ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5526.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - The Logical Structure of Thought Experiments</A>") I extrapolate to the thesis that every <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>26</SUP> is reducible to such a set. </li><li>The official role of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>27</SUP> is to test <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_1/Notes_121.htm">modal</A><SUP>28</SUP> consequences. The apparent narrowness of its function eases once we realize that there are many kinds of necessity: logical, physical, technological, moral. But the real flexibility of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>29</SUP> wriggles up from the indirect uses of this official procedure. Just as jokes, metaphor, and politeness are conveyed through trick bounces off conventions governing literal conversation, <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experimenters</A><SUP>30</SUP> use the standard format obliquely to transact a rich array of side tasks; concocting counterexamples to definitions and "laws," expanding the domain of theories, exhibiting <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_1/Notes_121.htm">modal</A><SUP>31</SUP> fallacies, deriving astounding consequences, suggesting impossibility proofs. </li><li>The paradox analysis is further deepened in chapter 7 ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5527.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Conflict Vagueness and Precisification</A>") by a special application to the genre of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>32</SUP> that fascinated Kuhn. Having taken Kuhn's insight as far as I can, chapter 8 ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5528.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - The Evolution of Thought Experiments</A>") returns <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>33</SUP> to their unregimented state. The suspicion that '<A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>34</SUP>' is a systematically misleading expression is addressed in chapter 9 ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5529.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Are Thought Experiments Experiments?</A>"). </li><li>My final chapter ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5530.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Fallacies and Antifallacies</A>") assesses the hazards and pseudohazards of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>35</SUP>. If there are sides to be taken, I count myself among the friends of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>36</SUP>. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5520_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5520_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: But with Chapter summaries excerpted to the relevant Chapters. <BR><BR> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5521.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Our Most Curious Device</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Chapter 1<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Author s <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5521_1">Abstract</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5521_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Chapter 1 motivates the study of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>2</SUP>  in broad strokes. Their power is displayed by assembling influential <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>3</SUP> from the history of science. </li><li>I then lay out my plan to understand philosophical <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>4</SUP> by concentrating on their resemblance to scientific relatives. </li><li>Points of difference between philosophical and scientific <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>5</SUP> give us a preview of obstacles that must be overcome in the course of the campaign. </li><li>Nave and sophisticated reservations about the philosophical cases are registered for the same purpose. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>The Instrument of Choice  7</li><li>Scientific <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>6</SUP>  8</li><li>The Bridge to Philosophical <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>7</SUP>  11</li><li>Analytic Philosophy's Commitment to <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiment</A><SUP>8</SUP>  15 </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5521.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Our Most Curious Device</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5521_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5521_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: Taken from "<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>". <BR><BR> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5522.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Scepticism About Thought Experiments</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Chapter 2<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Author s <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5522_1">Abstract</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5522_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Detailed structuring of the issues begins by making chapter 2 a forum for sceptics. </li><li>Doubts about <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>2</SUP> are given their most damning expression to date. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Introspection on the Sly? 21<BR>& A. The Internal Horizon  21<BR>& B. Complaints About Introspection  22<BR>& C. The Parallel Plight of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>3</SUP>  26</li><li>A Repackaged Appeal to Ordinary Language? 41<BR>& A. How the Appeal to Ordinary Language Is Supposed to Work  42<BR>& B. Strong Scepticism About the Appeal to Ordinary Language  42<BR>& C. Moderate Scepticism About the Appeal to Ordinary Language  43<BR>& D. Semantic Descent to <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>4</SUP>  45</li><li><A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>5</SUP> and the Dilemma of Informativeness  46 </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5522.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Scepticism About Thought Experiments</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5522_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5522_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: Taken from "<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>". <BR><BR> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5523.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Mach and Inner Cognitive Africa</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Chapter 3<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Author s <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5523_1">Abstract</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5523_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li></li><li>The technique (of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experimentation)</A><SUP>2</SUP> looks discredited by the time sceptics yield the floor to Ernst Mach in chapter 3. This Austrian philosopher-physicist was the earliest and most systematic writer on <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>3</SUP> (and, not coincidentally, mentor of the young Albert Einstein). </li><li>Mach's views are of more than historical interest: they are insightful, fairly accurate, and fertile. </li><li>My limited disagreements with Mach spring from his sensationalism  the view that everything worth saying is reducible to commentary on sense data. </li><li>I argue that this extreme empiricism misled him into an overly narrow account of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>4</SUP>, ill-suited to <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>5</SUP> falling outside the natural sciences. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Instinctive Knowledge  51</li><li>The Continuum of Cognitive Bargain Hunters  58</li><li>Mach's Response to the Problem of Informativeness  61</li><li>Appraisal of Mach  63<BR>& A. What Mach Got Right  63<BR>& B. What Mach Got Wrong  67 </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5523.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Mach and Inner Cognitive Africa</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5523_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5523_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: Taken from "<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>". <BR><BR> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5524.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - The Wonder of Armchair Inquiry</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Chapter 4<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Author s <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5524_1">Abstract</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5524_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Part of this chapter is deflationary; I trace a portion of our wonder about a priori enlightenment to <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_1/Notes_121.htm">modal</A><SUP>2</SUP> fallacies. </li><li>The positive part addresses curiosity about the mechanisms underlying armchair inquiry. Philosophers and psychologists have been influenced by several vague models of non-observational enlightenment. Mach said that <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>3</SUP> draw from a storehouse of unarticulated experience. This answer to the question of how it can be fruitful to sit and think is an empiricist version of Plato's doctrine of recollection, which pictures knowers as rememberers. </li><li>In the 1960s, ordinary language philosophers defended their appeals to "what we would say" with a linguistic descendent of Plato's doctrine: knowledge of how to speak is transformed into knowledge that the rules for the term are such-and-such. </li><li>The homuncular model, made respectable by the rise of cognitive psychology in the 1970s, pictures people as composed of subsystems ("little people") that act within the larger system much as personnel behave within a firm. The armchair investigator shifts information from one subsystem to another, so that facts familiar to one part are news to another part. </li><li>This intrapersonal communication, pooling, and delegation of questions produces a better-informed person even though no fresh data has been gathered. </li><li>A fourth model focuses on how information can be made more informative by rearranging it in ways that facilitate its storage, retrieval, and deployment in inference. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>The Pseudoanomaly  76<BR>& A. <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_1/Notes_121.htm">Modal</A><SUP>4</SUP> Gap Illusions  77<BR>& B. How <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>5</SUP> Yield <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_1/Notes_121.htm">Modal</A><SUP>6</SUP> Conclusions  79</li><li>Positive Theories of Armchair Inquiry  88<BR>& A. The Recollection Model  88<BR>& B. The Transformation Model  92<BR>& C. The Homuncular Model  95<BR>& D. The Rearrangement Model  99</li><li>The Cleansing Model  104<BR>& A. How <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiment</A><SUP>7</SUP> Corrects Imbalances  104<BR>& B. Theoretical and Practical Irrationality  106</li><li>An Eclectic View of the Mechanics of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiment</A><SUP>8</SUP>  109 </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5524.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - The Wonder of Armchair Inquiry</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5524_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5524_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: Taken from "<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>". <BR><BR> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5525.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Kuhntradictions</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Chapter 5<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Author s <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5525_1">Abstract</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5525_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Thomas Kuhn's work on <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>2</SUP> gives me a running start. In "A Function for Thought <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5525_3">Experiments</A></U><SUB>3</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5525_3"></A>," he argued that they revealed a special kind of contradiction  a type of local incoherency. </li><li>Standard logic has no room for this notion of a noninfectious, contingent contradiction. Hence, Kuhn's persuasive and insightful application of this feral concept startles conservatives like me. </li><li>After showing why we should continue to side with standard logic, I try to salvage the insight driving Kuhn's heresy in chapter 5. The basic idea is that a group of tricky factors leads Kuhn to construe relative inconsistency as an exotic sort of absolute inconsistency. </li><li>Crucial to the diagnosis is identification of the tricky <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>4</SUP> as <em>paradoxes</em>. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Kuhn on the Received Opinion  111</li><li>Misfits  112</li><li>The Left Hand of Logic  114</li><li>Truth or Dare? 116<BR>& A. The Incoherence of Incoherent Concepts  116<BR>& B. Violation of Logical Conservatism  119</li><li>Reconstruction of Kuhn's Error  122<BR>& A. The Guts of Paradox  122<BR>& B. Conflationary Factors  123<BR>& C. The Phenomenology of Inconsistency  127<BR>& D. Counteranalysis of Kuhn's Cases  128<BR>& E. Taxonomic Prospects  130 </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5525.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Kuhntradictions</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5525_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5525_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: Taken from "<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>". <a name="On-Page_Link_P5525_3"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5525_3"><B>Footnote 3</B></A></U>: I have <ul type="disc"><li>"<A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_01/PaperSummary_1067.htm">Kuhn (Thomas) - A Function For Thought Experiments</A>", and </li><li>"<A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_02/PaperSummary_2998.htm">Kuhn (Thomas) - A Function For Thought Experiments</A>" </li></ul>which are presumably the same paper. <BR><BR> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5526.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - The Logical Structure of Thought Experiments</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Chapter 6<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Author s <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5526_1">Abstract</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5526_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>A paradox is a small set of individually plausible yet jointly inconsistent propositions. </li><li>In chapter 6 I extrapolate to the thesis that every <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>2</SUP> is reducible to such a set. Indeed, I argue that they are all reducible to two highly specific forms of paradox one targeting statements implying necessities, the other targeting statements implying possibilities. </li><li>These two closely related sets are the standardized formats I craved in the discussion of the cleansing model. They are the molds into which raw <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>3</SUP> can be poured. They then enter the logician's mill. </li><li>While in this admittedly artificial state, <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>4</SUP> can be systematically classified in accordance with which member of the paradox is slated for rejection. Both types of paradoxes have exactly five members, so the taxonomic system has a manageable scale. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Attributing <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>5</SUP>  132</li><li><A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>6</SUP> as Alethic Refuters  135<BR>& A. Necessity Refuters  135<BR>& B. The Five Responses to the Quintet  136<BR>& C. Summary of Necessity Refuters  152<BR>& D. Possibility Refuters  153<BR>& E. Summary of Possibility Refuters  159</li><li>The Identity Conditions for <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>7</SUP>  160</li><li>An Extension to Ordinary Experiments  164</li><li>The Big Picture  165 </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5526.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - The Logical Structure of Thought Experiments</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5526_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5526_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: Taken from "<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>". <BR><BR> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5527.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Conflict Vagueness and Precisification</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Chapter 7<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Author s <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5527_1">Abstract</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5527_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>The paradox analysis is further deepened in chapter 7 by a special application to the genre of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>2</SUP> that fascinated Kuhn. </li><li>This special class is powered by conflict vagueness, a linguistic property that appears to make a normally well-behaved concept "come apart." <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought experiments</A><SUP>3</SUP> that probe this nerve of indeterminacy are apt to force conceptual revision. </li><li>Since conflict vagueness can be neatly dissected, I complete the chapter with a classification of the ways concepts change in response to this provocative family of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>4</SUP>. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>General Features of Vagueness  167</li><li>Dueling Definitions  168<BR>& A. The Psychology of Conflict Vagueness  168<BR>& B. How Conflict Vagueness Creates the Mirage of Local Incoherence  170<BR>& C. Extensional Conflict Vagueness  171<BR>& D. Intensional Conflict Vagueness  172</li><li>Application of the Quintet Schema  174</li><li>Conceptual Reform  175</li><li>Eliminative Reactions to Conflict Vagueness  180</li><li>Tolerating the Vagueness  180</li><li>Extending the Analysis  181</li><li>Sunder  Enlighten! 184 </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5527.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Conflict Vagueness and Precisification</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5527_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5527_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: Taken from "<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>". <BR><BR> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5528.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - The Evolution of Thought Experiments</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Chapter 8<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Author s <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5528_1">Abstract</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5528_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Having taken Kuhn's insight as far as I can, this chapter returns <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>2</SUP> to their unregimented state. </li><li>My goal here is to define '<A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>3</SUP>' and dig to its origin. I argue that <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>4</SUP> evolved from experiment through a process of attenuation. This builds inductive momentum behind the theme that <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>5</SUP> are experiments. </li><li>My commitment to viewing them as limiting cases of experiment is solidified by defining <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>6</SUP> as experiments that purport to deal with their questions by contemplation of their design rather than by execution. But in the course of this analysis another reduction is endorsed: in addition to being experiments and paradoxes, <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>7</SUP> are stories. </li><li>This brings one of the book's minor themes into prominence: many of the issues raised by <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>8</SUP> are prefigured in aesthetics and the logic of fiction. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>'Experiment' Defined  186<BR>& A. Stereotypical Features of Experiment  186<BR>& B. A Cognitive Aim Is Essential to Experiment  189</li><li>Execution Is an Optional Part of Experiment  190</li><li>The Progression from Experiment to <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiment</A><SUP>9</SUP>  192</li><li>Classifying <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>10</SUP> by Grounds for Inaction  197<BR>& A. Unimprovables  197<BR>& B. Unaffordables  199<BR>& C. Impossibles  200</li><li>The Immigration of the Supposition Operator  202</li><li>A Definition of '<A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiment</A><SUP>11</SUP>'  205<BR>& A. The Selectivity of the Definition  206<BR>& B. Stereotypical Features of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>12</SUP>  208</li><li>Verbal Disputes over '<A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiment</A><SUP>13</SUP>'  210</li><li>Five Theses Recapitulated  212 </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5528.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - The Evolution of Thought Experiments</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5528_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5528_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: Taken from "<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>". <BR><BR> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5529.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Are Thought Experiments Experiments?</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Chapter 9<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Author s <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5529_1">Abstract</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5529_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>The suspicion that '<A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>2</SUP>' is a systematically misleading expression is addressed in chapter 9. </li><li>Since I put so much weight on the accuracy of the surface grammar, I itemize how '<A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>3</SUP>' is actually a systematically leading expression. </li><li>This catalogue of hot tips raises a variety of issues ranging from how <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>4</SUP> differ from simulations to the ethics of fantasy. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>Systematically Misleading Expressions  216</li><li>Comparisons with Lookalikes  218<BR>& A. Imaginary Experiments  218<BR>& B. Fictional Experiments  222<BR>& C. Mythical Experiments  224<BR>& D. Models, Simulations, Reenactments  225</li><li>The Analogy with Ordinary Experiments  228<BR>& A. The Taxonomic Point of the Analogy  229<BR>& B. Points of Resemblance  230<BR>& C. Points of Difference  241<BR>& D. Bogus Points of Difference  248</li><li>A Lopsided Tally  250 </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5529.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Are Thought Experiments Experiments?</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5529_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5529_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: Taken from "<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>". <BR><BR> <P ALIGN = "Justify"><FONT Size = 2 FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><HR><BR>"<B><A HREF = "../../../PaperSummaries/PaperSummary_05/PaperSummary_5530.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Fallacies and Antifallacies</A></B>"<BR><BR><B>Source</B>: Thought Experiments, Roy A. Sorensen, 1992, Chapter 10<BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><BR><BR><u>Author s <U><A HREF="#On-Page_Link_P5530_1">Abstract</A></U><SUB>1</SUB><a name="On-Page_Return_P5530_1"></A></u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>My final chapter assesses the hazards and pseudohazards of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>2</SUP>. </li><li>Although I grant that there are interesting ways in which the method leads us astray, I attack most scepticism about <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>3</SUP> as arbitrary. </li><li>Once we apply standards that are customary for compasses, stethoscopes, and other testing devices, we find that <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiments</A><SUP>4</SUP> measure up. They should be used (as they generally are used) as part of a diversified portfolio of techniques. All of these devices are individually susceptible to abuse, fallacy, and error. But, happily, they provide a network of cross-checks that make for impressive collective reliability. </li><li>So if there are sides to be taken, I count myself among the friends of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">thought experiment</A><SUP>5</SUP>. </li></ol> </FONT><BR><u>Sections</u><FONT COLOR = "800080"><ol type="1"><li>The Biological Baseline  252</li><li>Myths and Abuses  254</li><li>Fallacious <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>6</SUP>  256<BR>& A. Missupposition  257<BR>& B. Perspectival Illusions  259<BR>& C. Framing Effects  261<BR>& D. Biases of <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiment</A><SUP>7</SUP>  261<BR>& E. Jumping the If / Ought Gap  269<BR>& F. Overweighting Negative <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_0/Notes_32.htm">Thought Experiments</A><SUP>8</SUP>  271<BR>& G. The Additive Fallacy  272<BR>& H. The Blindspot Fallacy  273</li><li>Antifallacies  274<BR>& A. General Characterization of Antifallacies  274<BR>& B. The Far Out Antifallacy  277<BR>& C. Strangeness In, Strangeness Out? 284<BR>& D. The Voyeur Antifallacy  285<BR>& E. The Kabuki Antifallacy  286</li><li>A Parting Comparison  288 </li></ol> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT COLOR = "0000FF"><B>COMMENT: </B>Photocopy of complete Book filed in "<A HREF = "../../../BookSummaries/BookSummary_05/BookPaperAbstracts/BookPaperAbstracts_5975.htm">Various - Papers on Identity Boxes: Vol 17 (S2: Sm+)</A>".</P><BR><HR><BR><U><B>In-Page Footnotes</U> ("<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5530.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Fallacies and Antifallacies</A>")</B><a name="On-Page_Link_P5530_1"></A><BR><BR><U><A HREF="#On-Page_Return_P5530_1"><B>Footnote 1</B></A></U>: Taken from "<A HREF = "../../../Abstracts/Abstract_05/Abstract_5520.htm">Sorensen (Roy) - Thought Experiments: Introduction</A>". <BR><BR> <a name="ColourConventions"></a><hr><br><B><U>Text Colour Conventions</U> (see <A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_10/Notes_1025.htm">disclaimer</a>)</B><OL TYPE="1"><LI><FONT COLOR = "0000FF">Blue</FONT>: Text by me; &copy; Theo Todman, 2018</li><LI><FONT COLOR = "800080">Mauve</FONT>: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); &copy; the author(s)</li></OL> </center> <BR><HR><BR><center> <TABLE class = "Bridge" WIDTH=950> <TR><TD WIDTH="30%">&copy; Theo Todman, June 2007 - August 2018.</TD> <TD WIDTH="40%">Please address any comments on this page to <A HREF="mailto:theo@theotodman.com">theo@theotodman.com</A>.</TD> <TD WIDTH="30%">File output: <time datetime="2018-08-03T00:04" pubdate>03/08/2018 00:04:15</time> <br><A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_10/Notes_1010.htm">Website Maintenance Dashboard</A> </TD></TR><TD WIDTH="30%"><A HREF="#Top">Return to Top of this Page</A></TD> <TD WIDTH="40%"><A HREF="../../../Notes/Notes_11/Notes_1140.htm">Return to Theo Todman's Philosophy Page</A></TD> <TD WIDTH="30%"><A HREF="../../../index.htm">Return to Theo Todman's Home Page</A></TD> </TR></TABLE></CENTER><HR> </BODY> </HTML>