Doth Socrates not like young beautiful males? And is it not true I am young, relatively beautiful, and biologically male? Not just on the outside, butDoth Socrates not like young beautiful males? And is it not true I am young, relatively beautiful, and biologically male? Not just on the outside, but inside beauty too? In pursuit of wisdom, and aware of folly?
Oh yes Socrates yes, please will you instill seeds of virtue in me? Teach me, and punish me, of the ways of virtue? Show me the Form, of the Good? Let it fill me, and my soul? In every deed I do, let it show?
Have I mistaken the form of Socrates for The Form? Is it so bad, to be misled in paramour? For it is not possible, the socratic problem be my socratic paradox? Did lady Diotima not teach loving beauty of a single body, to all, and to the Thing itself? So too...have I taken...this journey...with you? You wise old man! You wonderfully ironic boy! Through your example and existence, not just what you express, have I glimpsed the Good? Oracle of Delphi, wise her rule? That you are, wisest of them all?
But what have you done to me? What curse has beset me? Have I become so awakened, that I can not stop asking? How can I be availed of this existence? How can I escape this enslavement?
Have we not learned anything? Those who claim to understand without having actually understood and proceed to provide commentary on the Critique of PuHave we not learned anything? Those who claim to understand without having actually understood and proceed to provide commentary on the Critique of Pure Reason, a work which draws the line for dogmatists, may be said to be dogmatists.
Curious, though, that a critique of reason, albeit pure reason, was performed using careful reasoning itself.
Curious how the limits of reason and cognition were found from within the confines of reason and cognition itself.
Curious how by virtue of the Critique of Pure Reason, a unity of all thought, reason is able to observe the tendency to unity.
Curious is synthetic a priori knowledge itself; how there can be knowledge of the world that is independent of experience.
Curious how from empirical sources, pure conceptions have been derived.
Curious how the concepts of all concepts may be said to be the categories.
Curious how natural causes can be simultaneous with their effects.
Curious how the cognition of ourselves and cognition of objects are simultaneously necessary for each other. How, “the conditions of the possibility of experience in general are at the same time conditions of the possibility of the objects of experience."
Curious how, "Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind."
It is the claim that whence upon reading the Critique of Pure Reason, the empirical or sensory manifold of raw material of such goes through the faculty of sensibility and becomes an object(s), then through perception within the a prior confines of the concepts of space then time and becomes an intuition(s), then in the understanding through the a priori ~4-12 categories of judgment and becomes a concept(s), then to reason or apperception to become phenomena/appearances or potentially noumena. Simply put, the Critique of Pure Reason itself, "representation of things, as they are given to us, does not conform to these things as they are in themselves, but rather that these objects, as appearances, conform to our manner of representation". This "Copernican Revolution" that which is the Critique of Pure Reason goes through the Critique of Pure Reason itself....more
Is it not uncertain whether the effect of my realizations about the disconnection of causes and effects is due to the cause of reading An Enquiry ConcIs it not uncertain whether the effect of my realizations about the disconnection of causes and effects is due to the cause of reading An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding? The most excellent definition of causation being "if the first object had not been, the second never had existed" is not true in this case since I, as with Hume, may have been able to realize this independently. It is said correlation does not entail causation, and reading Hume does not necessarily entail that it was the cause of me realizing the same ideas. It seems further experimentation will be necessary.
I submit that multiple individuals read An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding as the experimental group and have another group read randomly selected books as the control group. Then, let us have them take a reading comprehension test or perhaps have them submit reviews on some platform, call it notbadtexts.com, for comparison. Using tests of statistical significance, it will thus be able to be confirmed whether the effect of learning about the disconnection of causes and effects was indeed due to the cause of reading a book about such. I daresay this may be the most important scientific experiment on causality to ever be devised. It is imperative we test and confirm whether causal effects indeed lead to thoughts about causal effects, elsewise the entire scientific enterprise may currently be compromised.
Anyhow, the weather today was nice, and I look forward to supper.
Ah, right, but was it not also said "A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence"? Tis true, tis true... However, an experiment of such a kind would be of the highest order of evidence. Rather than theorizing the validity of those notions, such an experiment would finally make them become a matter of fact about matters of fact. For "a weaker evidence can never destroy a stronger."
We will then be able to compound our certainty by performing an experiment on the effects of reading about an experiment (a cause) on the effects of reading about the true nature of causality from a text called An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (another cause). Ad infinitum. Thus, a means has been established of having certainty about certainty, which is the greatest form of certainty.
Has thee Bayes been beaten? Has thy necessity of Kantian transcendental pure reason been admonished?...more
"In vain do we extend our view into the heavens, and pry into the entrails of the earth, in vain do we consult the writings of learned men, and trace
"In vain do we extend our view into the heavens, and pry into the entrails of the earth, in vain do we consult the writings of learned men, and trace the dark footsteps of antiquity; we need only draw the curtain of words, to behold the fairest tree of knowledge, whose fruit is excellent, and within the reach of our hand."
The diagnosis of the problem of knowledge, according to Berkeley, is that of words. True to his statements, Berkeley went so far as to deliberately avoid using the ideas of others and instead use only those ideas and words that were his. I must note here that I sincerely appreciate it when those who espouse a philosophy also act in accordance to it. Diogenes comes to mind here. However, in this case, this was also a bit close minded, which is not a trait that I would typically ascribe to those who acquaint themselves with philosophy.
Berkeley points out various issues throughout. For example, the notion of matter involves a contradiction in it, a true idea of something such as motion is impossible, and some ideas are intricately tied to others such as how the idea of pure space exclusive of all body seems impossible. These were in addition to more typical issues such as the multiple uses of languages.
The observations on abstracting were what I found to be most useful in this text. Berkeley makes the comparison that for a given truth about the characteristics of triangles "to be certain this proposition is universally true, we must either make a particular demonstration for every particular triangle, which is impossible, or once for all demonstrate it of the abstract idea of a triangle, in which all the particulars do indifferently partake, and by which they are all equally represented." This, of course, reminds me of the problem of induction. Interestingly, taking this to an extreme, Berkeley notes at one point how despite the abstract idea of unity being one which can accompany all other ideas, it is not necessarily the most familiar to understanding or perception.
In An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Locke stated that, "The mind thinks in proportion to the matter it gets from experience to think about." However, what I found as an interesting yet vital connotation of this made by Berkeley is that this is not only true on an individual level, however that the same could be said at a collective level for the cumulative body of all human knowledge. Berkeley states, "It is evident to any one who takes a survey of the objects of human knowledge, that they are either ideas actually imprinted on the senses, or else such as are perceived by attending to the passions and operations of the mind, or lastly ideas formed by help of memory and imagination, either compounding, dividing, or barely representing those originally perceived in the aforesaid ways."
Overall, quite nice. Besides some of the notions on immaterialism and connections to God, there was much that I garnered from this....more
Leibniz, the person who co-invented calculus besides Newton, responds to An Essay Concerning Human Understanding by Locke. (Words can not encompass thLeibniz, the person who co-invented calculus besides Newton, responds to An Essay Concerning Human Understanding by Locke. (Words can not encompass the exhilaration of typing that.)
In the spirit of Leibniz selecting sections of text, and for the sake of simplicity, I shall do the same here. A review of a review of sorts.
"There was an Italian who knew this very well: when he was going to be tortured he resolved to keep the gallows continually before his mind's eye, the better to bear up under his agonies; he was heard from time to time saying' I see you', and he explained what he meant later on, after his deliverance. Unless we resolve firmly to keep our minds on true good and true evil, so as to pursue the one and avoid the other, we find ourselves carried away, and the most important needs of this life are treated in the same way as heaven and hell are, even by their truest believers:"
Initially I had misread this as the Italian saying such to those who were torturing him. As a result of this misread I wonder whether, in specific situations of witnessing evil or having evil done to oneself, those few words can act akin to a spell to make a perpetrator uncomfortable, less forceful, or stop altogether?
"But there is no need for us to fix upon logically lowest species: we can indeed go on endlessly varying them, as is illustrated by the many varieties of oranges, limes and lemons which expert people can name and tell apart. The same thing happened with tulips and carnations when these flowers were in fashion. In any case, man's combining or not combining such and such ideas - or indeed their being or not being actually combined in nature - has no bearing on essences, genera and species, since they depend only upon possibilities, and these are independent of our thinking."
"Thus, although nature can furnish more perfect and more convenient ideas, it will not give the lie to any ideas we have which are sound and natural even if they are perhaps not the soundest and most natural."
"although I really believe that languages are the best mirror of the human mind, and that a precise analysis of the significations of words would tell us more than anything else about the operations of the understanding."
"Very good. Words are just as much reminders (notae) for oneself - in the way that numerals and algebraic symbols might be - as they are signs for others; and the use of words as signs occurs when general precepts are being applied in daily life,"
"This iambic hexameter from Latin tragedy: Cuivis potest accidere, quod cuiquam potest [Publilius Syrus], which is a more elegant way of saying' What can happen to one can happen to any', merely serves to remind us of the human condition, 'that we ought not to regard anything human as alien to us ' [Terence]. The jurists' rule which says: qui jure suo utitur, nemini facit injuriam (he who exercises his rights does wrong to nobody) appears trifling."
"In it M. Conring reproved Pappus for saying that analysis undertakes to discover the unknown by assuming it and then proceeding by inference from it to known truths. This, he said, is contrary to logic, which teaches that truths can be inferred from falsehoods."
"I maintain, that the principle of principles really amounts to making good use of ideas and of experiments;"
"This is because men judge things only in accordance with their experience, which is extremely limited, and whatever does not conform with it appears to them absurd."
"One wishes that the men who have power had knowledge in proportion: even if it did not include detailed knowledge of the sciences, the [practical] arts, history, and languages, it might suffice if they had sound, practised judgment and knowledge of broad and general matters - in brief, of the most important points."
I would add that the general ability to think and reason may be a necessary yet distinct component. For example, there are many a student who are knowledgeable yet fail at thinking beyond the syllabus or solving real world problems.
"Just as a hundred horses run no faster than one, although they can haul a greater load, so with a hundred men as compared with a single man: they cannot walk any straighter, but they will work more effectively; they cannot judge better, but they will be able to provide more of the materials on which judgment may be exercised. That is the meaning of the proverb' Two eyes see more than one'. This can be observed in assemblies, where vast numbers of considerations are presented which one or two people might never have thought of; though there is often a risk that the best decision will not be reached through these considerations, because no competent people have been given the task of thinking them over and weighing them up."
An interpretation of this may be that all the effort and resources of the world are utterly useless if not directed properly. In practice though, it is likely an optimization of (near) inconceivable degrees and types.
"I know of two main ways of organizing the totality of doctrinal truths. Each has its merits, and is worth bringing in. One is synthetic and theoretical: it involves setting out truths according to the order in which they are proved, as the mathematicians do, so that each proposition comes after those on which it depends. The other arrangement is analytic and practical: it starts with the goal of mankind, namely with the goods whose sum total is happiness, and conducts an orderly search for means which will achieve those goods and avoid the corresponding ills. These two methods are applicable to the realm of knowledge in general, and some people have also used them within particular sciences."
"To these two kinds of arrangement we must add a third. It is classification by terms, and really all it produces is a kind of Inventory. The latter could be systematic, with the terms being ordered according to certain categories shared by all peoples, or it could have an alphabetical order within the accepted language of the learned world. This Inventory is needed if one is to assemble all the propositions in which a given term occurs in a significant enough way. For in the other two procedures, where truths are set out according to their origins or according to their use, the truths which concern some one term cannot all occur together."
"Well, now, it strikes me as curious that these three kinds of arrangement correspond to the ancient division, revived by you, which divides science or philosophy into theoretical, practical and deductive, or into natural philosophy, ethics and logic. The synthetic arrangement corresponds to the theoretical, the analytic to the practical, and the one with an Inventory according to terms corresponds to logic."
As with Locke, another unsatisfying conclusion. Though, Leibniz has much that is good in those last three quotes....more
Discourse on Method I enjoyed the writing style of this being in the form of a journal on how Descartes set out and then arrived at his conclusions. AlDiscourse on Method I enjoyed the writing style of this being in the form of a journal on how Descartes set out and then arrived at his conclusions. Although many statements throughout were besides the point, at least in the first few chapters they were useful to observe. For example, the reasons for thinking and creating this, then the elaboration of using methodologies of mathematics to do so.
I can reaffirm that part one is most definitely a mirror image of ideas espoused by Buddhism. To the degree that specific part may have been independently discovered, perhaps Descartes should not be at fault but rather those who give Descartes more credit than he is due (such as those of us alive now). Although, such a statement may be said of numerous other examples of misplaced credit throughout history.
The famed "I think therefore I am" was interesting to finally observe. However, in all my prior exposure to this notion, I had built up a misperception that many fundamental observations and axioms were used and perhaps needed to eventually, in some grandiose manner, lead to such a conclusion. Instead, it seemed to be a relatively straightforward conclusion.
In the latter parts, I appreciated Descartes' thoughts on approaches to science. The notion of a collaborative enterprise to discover truths of nature is a notion well established now, but was not necessarily so in the time of Descartes. He also mentioned the notion of people reporting even those experiments which failed, which reminded me of how science collectively may in fact simply be the testing of every experiment to exhaustion until nature is completely understood (if it ever can be).
I was not expecting this to be as short as it was, and appreciated how Descartes deliberately tried to keep it brief by voicing an implicit comparison to the works of other philosophers at one point.
Meditations This seemed to have much more content, focus, and organization overall compared to Discourse on Method.
The thought experiment of an evil spirit/demon and to forget all the senses one possesses was my favorite part here. I found this to be an incredibly clever approach and illustration for the discovery of truths. I suppose I would simply congratulate Descartes for such an approach, however simple it may be. Furthermore, this may also be said to be the classic example of rationalism.
The parts on God were not really useful for me, but nonetheless interesting. Topics touched upon here were the notion of a first cause, the notion of something continually supporting the world, the notion that a thinking being must have been created by another thinking being such as God, the notion that a little of God is in oneself, or the notion of attempting to understand the infinite as a finite being.
Towards the end, matters regarding mind and body were discussed which were not bad. Again, classic rationalism.
(As a side note, the phrase "infinite variety of knowledge" in particular was interesting to me.)...more
Sometimes, the role of an artist or scientist is to express things that which people know to be true however can not or do not express themselves. ThiSometimes, the role of an artist or scientist is to express things that which people know to be true however can not or do not express themselves. This is how reading Locke feels like.
Exposition: The observations noted throughout the text are from the common experiences and phenomena in the lives of people. Hence, this meets the criterion for being grounded and relevant. Then, the numerous conclusions made based upon such had an aspect of tightness through naturally following the observations. Put together, and more specifically, Locke was ruthlessly intricate in that of explicitly stating the seemingly most obvious phenomena or notions, then checking every connotation of each statement to demonstrate conclusions, often non-obvious ones, with proper reasoning.
On a smaller note, Locke summons nostalgia in me of my days doing debate competitions. For the manner in which Locke briefly titled and numbered points throughout the text was the very way we would structure debate cases and speeches. Admittedly, I sincerely wish more texts, especially those more scientific or argumentative in nature, would adopt such a structure.
Content: In content, the text is sound psychology—at least, for its time. This was a pleasant surprise though, as I had read the text for its status of being an important work of epistemology, and thus had expected it to solely be philosophy. Another element of surprise were many of the ideas espoused in book III on words. I had thought those ideas were not discovered and reasoned out for at least a century or two more.
My favorite part of the entire text was Book III Chapter 4 Paragraph 12 where a brief example is given of demonstrating the same idea in different forms, a sculpture and a painting, to a blind man. Despite only having the capability to sufficiently sense the sculpture, the blind man nonetheless favored the painting whereby he "cried out, that certainly that must needs be a very admirable and divine piece of workmanship, which could represent to them all those parts, where he could neither feel nor perceive anything." I could talk endlessly about this. What relevance does this have to universals and particulars? What relevance does this have to potentiality? What are other phenomena that which perpetually permeate our perceptions and instruments yet we know not of them?
The text is not entirely perfect though. As a result of those numerous intricacies, it felt unnecessarily verbose or detailed at times. Many of the topics addressed were not directly important. I furthermore did not find many of the reasons given for the practicality of the notions espoused satisfying. This included the utility of book I not being a "castle in the air", latter discussions of the connections of thought to power and liberty, and the last chapter of the book with the vague mention of "practica" being a division of the sciences. In contrast, the practical solutions given after discussing the problems of words were well explained. (It should be a custom for people to equally exert themselves in presenting solutions as much as they complain about problems.)
Conclusion: Perhaps it is the thorough combination of ideas, perhaps it is the way Locke expressed them, or perhaps it is simply the ideas themselves, however I sincerely appreciated reading this. Despite the amount of noise and deviations from the core of the content, there is an abundance of solid ideas here....more
Indeed, I now see how this was such an influential text. It is quite comprehensive in breadth by addresGlaucon: The greatest yes-man of human history.
Indeed, I now see how this was such an influential text. It is quite comprehensive in breadth by addressing, well, almost everything about society. Given the context, specific topics addressed which surprised me were feminism, eugenics (alluded to), socialism (also alluded to), and aspects of arts. Also, the famous Socratic dialogue was interesting to finally observe in action. Though, this is not to forget the numerous issues in both content and presentation which philosophers ended up critiquing and debating about for centuries.
On the whole, there was little particularly noteworthy for me personally given my background and context. However, reading this did provide THE essential context for subsequent philosophical works....more
More personal notes: -I tend towards the physical sciences, however even I was able to appreciate the scintillating profundヽ(°〇°)ﾉ
Absolutely brilliant.
More personal notes: -I tend towards the physical sciences, however even I was able to appreciate the scintillating profundities of this work. As such, I would sincerely recommend this to anyone in any of the sciences due to how it could help them. Though, this is one of the most impactful books of human history in general, so I would reaffirm that position and recommend this to anyone. -I read this in order to better understand atheism after my exploration of religious texts. Mission accomplished. I now better understand why this work in particular, more so than other developments of science such as the heliocentric model of the solar system by Copernicus or gravity and the laws of motion by Newton, is considered important to the resistance to faith. -I have learned biology multiple times at various levels growing up. As such, I was aware of Darwin and had considered his ideas enough to know they had much merit. However, reading this book was significantly better than any presentation of the ideas I have experienced in classes, textbooks, or other medium. This may be in large part due to 1. the step by step inductive construction of the ideas rather than the out of context and random deductive presentation in classes, 2. the "down to earth" first hand observations and experiments by Darwin and others are demonstrated and provide a story of sorts, and 3. the questions, issues, and considerations Darwin had in his time, which all lent itself by keeping focus to the fundamentals of his ideas rather than being conflated and mixed with genetics as done when taught today.
While reading, I was amazed by the scope of literature Darwin referenced ranging as far as farming and husbandry, anthropology, archaeology, geography, geology, and history in general. Darwin also did not refrain from going into surgical detail at times. This contributed to how the book, throughout, felt very "down to earth" and practical. As such, the subject matter was also very approachable.
It was interesting to observe Darwin repeatedly run up against modern developments namely surrounding genes. For example, the mechanisms of variability and specificities of inheritance. It is clear that Darwin was at the absolute cutting edge of sciences, and that he evidently set the course for much of 20th century biology through his recognition of the shortcomings and mysteries existent at the time.
Deconstructed: 1. the observations and experiments which led to pieces of evidence, 2. the pieces of evidence themselves, 3. the organization and putting together of all the evidence, 4. the claims made based upon the evidence, and 5. the implications and impact (predictive power) of the claims.
Simply put, this book is not only a masterclass of building up an argument or theory, however it also contains profound ideas beyond life itself....more
Loading...
