- Submit
-
Browse
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- More
Works by Iulian D. Toader
8 found
Order:
- Distribution can be Dropped: Reply to Rumfitt.Iulian D. Toader - forthcoming - Analysis.Ian Rumfitt has argued that rational adjudication against classical logic in quantum mechanics is not only unnecessary, but impossible as well. I explain why the argument fails.
- Objectivity Sans Intelligibility. Hermann Weyl's Symbolic Constructivism.Iulian D. Toader - 2011 - Dissertation, University of Notre DameA new form of skepticism is described, which holds that objectivity and understanding are incompossible ideals of modern science. This is attributed to Weyl, hence its name: Weylean skepticism. Two general defeat strategies are then proposed, one of which is rejected.
- Structural Realism and the Problem of Inequivalent Representations in Quantum Field Theory.Iulian D. Toader - manuscriptThis unpublished paper, written in 2005 in the PhD philosophy program at Notre Dame, argues that algebraic structural realism faces a potentially fatal difficulty raised by the existence of inequivalent representations in quantum field theory.
- Categoricity and Negation. A Note on Kripke’s Affirmativism.Constantin C. Brîncuș & Iulian D. Toader - 2019 - In Igor Sedlár & Martin Blicha (eds.), The Logica Yearbook 2018. College Publications. pp. 57-66.We argue that, if taken seriously, Kripke's view that a language for science can dispense with a negation operator is to be rejected. Part of the argument is a proof that positive logic, i.e., classical propositional logic without negation, is not categorical.
- Categoricity and Possibility. A Note on Williamson's Modal Monism.Iulian D. Toader - 2020 - In Martin Blicha & Igor Sedlar (eds.), The Logica Yearbook 2019. College Publications. pp. 221-231.The paper sketches an argument against modal monism, more specifically against the reduction of physical possibility to metaphysical possibility. The argument is based on the non-categoricity of quantum logic.
- Physical Order and the Existence of God.Iulian D. Toader - 2013 - In Balan Marin (ed.), Athens and/or Jerusalem: Essays on the Relationship Between Science and Religion. University of Bucharest Press. pp. 133-142.This paper, written in Romanian, explains why the eutaxiological argument, endorsed by scientists like Newton, Einstein, and Weyl, and recently defended by Richard Swinburne, is not defensible.
- Fictionalism and Mathematical Objectivity.Iulian D. Toader - 2012 - In Mircea Dumitru, Mircea Flonta & Valentin Muresan (eds.), Metaphysics and Science. Dedicated to professor Ilie Pârvu. Universty of Bucharest Press. pp. 137-158.This paper, written in Romanian, compares fictionalism, nominalism, and neo-Meinongianism as responses to the problem of objectivity in mathematics, and then motivates a fictionalist view of objectivity as invariance.
- (1 other version)Talking Past Each Other: Mach and Husserl on Thought Economy.Iulian D. Toader - 2019 - In Friedrich Stadler (ed.), Ernst Mach – Life, Work, Influence. Springer Verlag. pp. 213-221.This paper argues that whereas Mach understood thought economy as a principle of practical rationality, Husserl rejected it as a principle of theoretical rationality. The distinction is further supported by their correspondingly different readings of the principle of permanence.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-6f97f49787-kd5kv uwo