Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Carl Ginet, Christopher Janaway and George Santayana

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these philosophers


6 ideas

1. Philosophy / C. History of Philosophy / 1. History of Philosophy
He who is ignorant of the history of philosophy is doomed to repeat it [Santayana, by MacIntyre]
     Full Idea: Santayana remarked that he who is ignorant of the history of philosophy is doomed to repeat it.
     From: report of George Santayana (The Life of Reason [1906]) by Alasdair MacIntyre - A Short History of Ethics Ch.1
     A reaction: Santayana's remark seems to have been about history in general, so this is a Macintyre thought. It obviously has a lot of truth, and most great philosophers seem hugely knowledgeable. However, ignorance brings a kind of freedom.
2. Reason / A. Nature of Reason / 5. Objectivity
We become objective when we detach ourselves from the world [Janaway]
     Full Idea: We apprehend the world purely objectively, only when we no longer know that we belong to it.
     From: Christopher Janaway (Schopenhauer [1994], II:368), quoted by Christopher Janaway - Schopenhauer 6 'Objectivity'
     A reaction: Since we are not actually detached from the world, that makes objective thought an act of imagination. And none the worse for that, I would say, since philosophers don't seem to understand the central epistemological importance of imagination.
7. Existence / A. Nature of Existence / 6. Criterion for Existence
The criterion of existence is the possibility of action [Santayana]
     Full Idea: The possibility of action ...is the criterion of existence, and the test of substantiality.
     From: George Santayana (The Realm of Matter [1930], p.107), quoted by John Heil - The Universe as We Find It
     A reaction: I rather like this. I think I would say the power is the criterion of existence.
13. Knowledge Criteria / A. Justification Problems / 1. Justification / a. Justification issues
Must all justification be inferential? [Ginet]
     Full Idea: The infinitist view of justification holds that every justification must be inferential: no other kind of justification is possible.
     From: Carl Ginet (Infinitism not solution to regress problem [2005], p.141)
     A reaction: This is the key question in discussing whether justification is foundational. I'm not sure whether 'inference' is the best word when something is evidence for something else. I am inclined to think that only propositions can be reasons.
Inference cannot originate justification, it can only transfer it from premises to conclusion [Ginet]
     Full Idea: Inference cannot originate justification, it can only transfer it from premises to conclusion. And so it cannot be that, if there actually occurs justification, it is all inferential.
     From: Carl Ginet (Infinitism not solution to regress problem [2005], p.148)
     A reaction: The idea that justification must have an 'origin' seems to beg the question. I take Klein's inifinitism to be a version of coherence, where the accumulation of good reasons adds up to justification. It is not purely inferential.
22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 2. Source of Ethics / e. Human nature
The good is not relative, but is rooted in facts about human needs [Santayana]
     Full Idea: The good is by no means relative to opinion, but is rooted in the unconscious and fatal nature of living beings, a nature which predetermines for them the difference between foods and poisons, happiness and misery.
     From: George Santayana (Platonism and the Spiritual Life [1927], p.3), quoted by John Gray - Seven Types of Atheism 6
     A reaction: That is, he concedes that the good is relative to human beings, but that the relevant facts about human beings are not relative. I think he has the correct picture. The key point is that the good is 'rooted' in something, and doesn't just float free.