Presumably, foundational principles are not based on underlying values.
The foundational myth of Rome relates the murder of Remus by his brother Romulus, whom the gods then valorize as the namesake of the city.
Biden also called for the repeal of a foundational law of the internet that currently shields Facebook and other sites from being held liable for people's posts.
There is another reason why one might be pessimistic about the prospects of foundational theories of meaning.
For the realists (dngos smra ba) ultimate truth is a foundational entity (rdzas su yod pa) that withstands rational analysis.
Moore (1903), Thomson’s target, is a foundational monist, but he accepts that there are non-foundational plural values.
The notion of the foundational consciousness is an attempt for Buddhists to account for personal causality without affirming a real self.
A foundational effort can be directed at many different branches of mathematics simultaneously, or just at some particular branch, such as arithmetic.
The term “theory of meaning” has, in the recent history of philosophy, been used to stand for both semantic theories and foundational theories of meaning.
In his own words, “the idea of ‘doing mathematics categorically’ involves a different point of view from the customary foundational one” (Awodey 2004: 55).
Accordingly, one sort of approach to foundational theories of meaning is simply to deny that there is any true foundational theory of meaning.
; the debate was amplified by Weyl’s defence of intuitionism in 1921, “On the New Foundational Crisis of Mathematics”; Hilbert responds in 1922, “The New Grounding of Mathematics”.
Semantic and foundational concerns are often interdependent, and it is difficult to find theories of word meaning which are either purely semantic or purely foundational.
According to foundationalism regarding knowledge, we have some foundational knowledge, and any nonfoundational or inferential knowledge that we have depends, ultimately, on this foundational knowledge.
Indeed, it will be argued that foundational concerns are at play throughout, so that any attempt to distinguish sharply between his “mathematical” and his “foundational” work is artificial and misleading.
A consequence of (3) and (4) is that foundationalism is undercut: there are no foundational claims that are especially infallible; and there are no non-foundational claims that are distinctively fallible.
However, even if the above counterexamples to sufficiency are met, we might question whether the externalist’s conditions capture something essential to or necessary for foundational justification, or for the justification of other beliefs on the basis of foundational ones.
To be sure, the shape of a correct semantic theory places constraints on the correct foundational theory of meaning, and vice versa; but that does not change the fact that semantic theories and foundational theories are simply different sorts of theories, designed to answer different questions.
Writers do not always make the distinction between foundational and other forms of pluralism, but as well as Thomson and Ross, at least Bernard Williams (1981), Charles Taylor (1982), Charles Larmore (1987), John Kekes (1993), Michael Stocker (1990 and 1997), David Wiggins (1997) and Christine Swanton (2001) are all committed to foundational pluralism.
The second is Bhāvavevika's non-foundationalist ontological argument which demonstrates all phenomena, including the atoms, are ultimately non-foundational, for ultimately there is nothing that can be taken as the foundational entity (dravya) or intrinsically real since the ultimate analysis reveals that all phenomena are composed of the atomic particles that are themselves composites.
On this page, there are 20 sentence examples for foundational. They are all from high-quality sources and constantly processed by lengusa's machine learning routines.
Just use the " " button to fragment sentence examples and start your learning flow.
Example output from one of your searches:
The second is Bhāvavevika's non-foundationalist ontological argument which demonstrates all phenomena including the atoms are ultimately non-foundational for ultimately there is nothing that can be taken as the foundational entity dravya or intrinsically real since the ultimate analysis reveals that all phenomena are composed of the atomic particles that are themselves composites