<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tina-Desiree Berg &#187; Philosophy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/index.php/category/philosophy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog</link>
	<description>Model. Actress. Philosopher. Whatever.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2011 16:11:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Occupy LA Rally and March</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2011/10/17/occupy-la-rally-and-march/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2011/10/17/occupy-la-rally-and-march/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:06:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life in General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moral and Political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[10/15/2011 rally]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[occupy la]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[occupy wall street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[osw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[protest]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/?p=480</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I attended the Occupy LA rally and march on10/15/2011. What I discovered was people from all walks of life- not crazy left-wing hippies as the greater media would have you believe. There were doctors, lawyers, real estate agents, students, immigrants, old and young. The message was clear: Get Money Out of politics. The way to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2011/10/17/occupy-la-rally-and-march/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can Foundationalism and Coherence Theory Co-exist? Part Three</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2010/02/17/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-three/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2010/02/17/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-three/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/?p=153</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Please note that this is part three of a three-part discussion Significantly-built into the notion discussed in part two- is the concept that the inferential transmission of our justification does not need to be deductive, but rather can be probabilistic or inductive. Epistemologist Robert Audi, in The Foundationalism-Coherentism Controversy, states, &#8220;Superstructure beliefs may be only [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2010/02/17/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-three/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can Foundationalism and Coherence Theory Co-exist? Part Two</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/20/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-two/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/20/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-two/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 22:36:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/?p=134</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Please note that this is part two of a three part discussion Empirical foundationalist Roderick Chisholm posits in The Myth of the Given that memory and perception are fallible and are some what a matter of coherence. Yet, he also thinks they belong to the class of justified basic beliefs. Why? Because we are human, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/20/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-two/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can Foundationalism and Coherence Theory Co-exist? Part One</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/15/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-one/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/15/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-one/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:22:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[coherence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fallibalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fallibist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foundationalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theory of justification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theory of knowledge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web of beliefs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/?p=115</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Please note that this is part one of a three part discussion Foundationalism dictates that knowledge, in the form of justified true belief, must be grounded in immediately evident, or non-inferentially justified basic beliefs. It therefore condones a form of knowledge that is hierarchichal, with epistemic chains arising from these basic beliefs. Coherentism, on the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/15/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-one/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Some Thoughts on Racial Essentialism and Hume</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/09/16/some-thoughts-on-racial-essentialism-and-hume/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/09/16/some-thoughts-on-racial-essentialism-and-hume/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:39:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Moral and Political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david hume]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[philosophy of race]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[racial essentialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[treatise of human nature]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/09/16/some-thoughts-on-racial-essentialism-and-hume/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This historical metaphysical concept dictated a belief in real essences- or the thing in any object that makes that object what it is. This idea originated with Aristotle in The Metaphysics. According to Aristotle, all natural kinds possessed essential properties that could not be changed or transformed because they are innate. He states, “Each thing [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/09/16/some-thoughts-on-racial-essentialism-and-hume/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Memory, Perception, and the A Priori define ‘The Given’</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/12/memory-perception-and-the-a-priori-define-%e2%80%98the-given%e2%80%99/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/12/memory-perception-and-the-a-priori-define-%e2%80%98the-given%e2%80%99/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:42:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logic and Philosophy of Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foundationalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roderick chisholm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self justified knowlefge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the myth of the given]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/12/memory-perception-and-the-a-priori-define-%e2%80%98the-given%e2%80%99/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some skeptical philosophers have wrongly characterized the class of basic beliefs in foundationalist theory known as ‘the given’ as a myth. In response, contemporary epistemologist Roderick Chisholm maintains that some beliefs can be self-justified independently, and that our other non-foundational beliefs, in turn, can be traced back to these basic beliefs. Yet, significantly, what does [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/12/memory-perception-and-the-a-priori-define-%e2%80%98the-given%e2%80%99/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I Have a Dream….</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/06/i-have-a-dream%e2%80%a6/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/06/i-have-a-dream%e2%80%a6/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 22:37:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Moral and Political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/06/i-have-a-dream%e2%80%a6/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[“I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…yes, I have a dream that my [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/06/i-have-a-dream%e2%80%a6/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Some Brief Thoughts on Schlick and Hilbert</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/02/some-thoughts-on-schlick-and-hilbert/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/02/some-thoughts-on-schlick-and-hilbert/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2009 22:13:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Logic and Philosophy of Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/02/some-thoughts-on-schlick-and-hilbert/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Moritz Schlick, inspired by David Hilbert’s work, took the concept of separating epistemology from its intuitive content much further. Schlick asserts, “it seemed intolerable that the ultimate principals- the axioms of geometry, which underlie all proofs and therefore are not themselves provable-should still owe their validity to intuition alone.” (The Nature of Knowledge, pg. 32) [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/02/some-thoughts-on-schlick-and-hilbert/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Some Thoughts on Carnap</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/12/13/some-thoughts-on-carnap/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/12/13/some-thoughts-on-carnap/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 01:16:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Logic and Philosophy of Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/12/13/some-thoughts-on-carnap/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The language of Physics, a language that both reports and predicts, is an inherently empirical language that must also make an appeal to the unobservable . As such, within the realm of Physics, distinctions need be clarified between two types of terms; those that are observable, and those that are theoretical, and, consequently, between two [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/12/13/some-thoughts-on-carnap/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Some Thoughts on Quine</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/12/03/some-thoughts-on-quine/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/12/03/some-thoughts-on-quine/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:22:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Logic and Philosophy of Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/12/03/some-thoughts-on-quine/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Two Dogmas of Empiricism, Quine critiques several attempts of defining the analyticity of synonnimity, definition, and semantical rules. His first observation is that the notion of synonnimity is in just as much need of definition as the concept of analyticity itself. Additionally, if we are to choose the concept of truth by definition, or [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/12/03/some-thoughts-on-quine/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.532 seconds -->

