Q&A: Three Copernican Revolutions
Three Copernican Revolutions
Question
Hello!
I recently came across Professor Zev Bechler’s book by this title. I flipped through it quickly, and in my haste it seemed to me that it deals a great deal with things the Rabbi has written about extensively.
If the Rabbi hasn’t seen it, then I’m only serving as a placeholder messenger. If he has—I’d be glad to know whether the Rabbi recommends it, agrees with it, disagrees with it?
Thank you.
Answer
I referred to this book several times in my book The Existing and the Non-Existing. It does indeed argue what I argue, and I definitely recommend the book. The problem is that he goes only halfway. He argues again and again against the actualist conception (= analyticity) and in favor of informativism (= syntheticity), but he doesn’t really offer it a well-founded alternative.
Beyond that, as is typical of an academic book, it focuses on what this or that person thought and less on examining the arguments in themselves. But he does go into examples and analyze them. In general, in my opinion it is an excellent book.
Discussion on Answer
I don’t remember (I read it about fifteen years ago). His main focus is the philosophy of science.
Thanks for the answer. Just out of curiosity: did you speak with him? Does he know your book? Did he respond to Two Wagons or to Truth and Stability?
We spoke, but I didn’t receive any response from him to my books.
Okay, thanks for the answers.
For some reason he argues in the book (according to Wikipedia) against the categorical imperative (and says that Kant created a monster with it). What made him think that? At first glance the categorical imperative seems like a pretty reasonable criterion for morality.