説明順序の逆転

「哲学的な観点からすると、ダーウィン的進化生物学についての驚くべきことは、目的論を種の起原の生物学的説明から追放したのみならず、新種の説明、つまり説明装置の順番をひっくり返す説明の形を、我々に与えてくれたことである」p.143.

(デネットみたいだが、言ったのはサール)

楽しいから笑うのではない。笑うから楽しいのだ。 ――ウィリアム・ジェームズ

As will be seen immediately, inversion in this sense is a devise for reversing priorities. William James summarized his famous theory of emotions (The Principles of Psychology)...by the assertion, "...the...rational statement is that we feel sorry because we cry...not that we cry...because we are sorry. (p. 450). Many philosophies can be summed up crudely (no doubt, not really accurately) by slogans in similar form: "We do not condemn certain acts because they are immoral; they are immoral because we condemn them." "We do not accept the law of contradiction because it is a necessary truth; it is a necessary truth because we accept it (by convention." "Fire and heat are not constantly conjoined because fire causes heat; fire causes heat because they are constantly conjoined" (Hume). "We do not all say 12+7-19 and the like because all grasp the concept of addition; we say we all grasp the concept of addition because we all say 12+7=19 and the like" (Wittgenstein).

The device of inversion of a conditional in the text achieves the effect of reversing priorities in a way congenial to such slogans. Speaking for myself, I am suspicious of philosophical positions of the types illustrated by the slogans, whether or not they are so crudely put." Saul Kripke (1982) Wittgenstein on Rules, pp. 93-4 note 76. ［HT Jody Azzouni］