data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8edae/8edaeb4bb7bbaee37879db51d2ab52a2ebf451d1" alt="Individuals by pf strawson pdf merge"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0bec3/0bec3be8abc8006505b331421f73fe78f977b55c" alt="individuals by pf strawson pdf merge individuals by pf strawson pdf merge"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c2a56/c2a561484ea8b15c9c5195a74092a130b58439b2" alt="individuals by pf strawson pdf merge individuals by pf strawson pdf merge"
Once this is acknowledged, certain traditional philosophical problems are seen not to be problems at all. “What I have been mainly arguing for is that we should acknowledge the logical primitiveness of the concept of a person and, with this, the unique logical character of certain predicates. Here’s a quote from the concluding section:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/35b26/35b26eb54a1ff55b02f784b192663f23dbd84aa8" alt="individuals by pf strawson pdf merge individuals by pf strawson pdf merge"
Then I did a search on the internet and found his paper, ‘Persons’ published in the Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science Vol. Strawson’s Individuals: An essay in descriptive metaphysics (1959) which discusses Strawson’s view of ‘Person’ as a ‘primitive concept’, in Chapter 3. How far is Strawson’s theory of Persons a critique of Hume’s theory of Self?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8edae/8edaeb4bb7bbaee37879db51d2ab52a2ebf451d1" alt="Individuals by pf strawson pdf merge"