[hist-analytic] Now Available: Elizabeth Anscombe's INTENTION!

Roger Bishop Jones rbj at rbjones.com
Mon May 31 02:30:37 EDT 2010

On Friday 28 May 2010 12:28, Baynesr at comcast.net wrote:

> Compare using a meter stick as supplying a standard unit
> measure and the idea of rotation in defining a degree as
> 1/360th of a rotation. Note that 'one rotation' is a
>  constant; something that doesn't depend on any
>  particular circle, whereas a meter stick is a
>  particular.

The difference may be explained by dimensional analysis in 
which all physical quantities are assigned a dimension which 
is some combination of mass, length, time, electric charge, 
and temperature, (denoted M, L, T, Q, and Θ, respectively)
(from the wikipedia).
Length is one of these primitive dimensions of physical 
quantity, but I think the degree is a dimensionless pure 
ratio, i.e. not a physical quantity at all, closely related 
to pi (there are 2pi radians in a circle).

>  This asymmetry is part of what is behind
>  some of my discussion of the contingent a priori etc.

Is this in the Anscombe book, or elsewhere?

As you know I regard the contingent a priori as one of 
Speranza's beloved vacuous concepts, in default of 
pathological interpretations of the terms involved.
I would be happy to spice up hist-analytic with a debate on 
the matter!

Roger Jones

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rbjones.com/pipermail/hist-analytic_rbjones.com/attachments/20100531/87691c8a/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the hist-analytic mailing list