Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Diogenes Laertius, Jonathan Schofield and John Haldane

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


9 ideas

2. Reason / C. Styles of Reason / 1. Dialectic
Dialectic involves conversations with short questions and brief answers [Diog. Laertius]
     Full Idea: Dialectic is when men converse by putting short questions and giving brief answers to those who question them.
     From: Diogenes Laertius (Lives of Eminent Philosophers [c.250], 3.1.52)
13. Knowledge Criteria / A. Justification Problems / 2. Justification Challenges / a. Agrippa's trilemma
Sceptics say demonstration depends on self-demonstrating things, or indemonstrable things [Diog. Laertius]
     Full Idea: Sceptics say that every demonstration depends on things which demonstrates themselves, or on things which can't be demonstrated.
     From: Diogenes Laertius (Lives of Eminent Philosophers [c.250], 9.Py.11)
     A reaction: This refers to two parts of Agrippa's Trilemma (the third being that demonstration could go on forever). He makes the first option sound very rationalist, rather than experiential.
13. Knowledge Criteria / D. Scepticism / 1. Scepticism
Scepticism has two dogmas: that nothing is definable, and every argument has an opposite argument [Diog. Laertius]
     Full Idea: Sceptics actually assert two dogmas: that nothing should be defined, and that every argument has an opposite argument.
     From: Diogenes Laertius (Lives of Eminent Philosophers [c.250], 9.Py.11)
13. Knowledge Criteria / D. Scepticism / 6. Scepticism Critique
When sceptics say that nothing is definable, or all arguments have an opposite, they are being dogmatic [Diog. Laertius]
     Full Idea: When sceptics say that they define nothing, and that every argument has an opposite argument, they here give a positive definition, and assert a positive dogma.
     From: Diogenes Laertius (Lives of Eminent Philosophers [c.250], 9.11.11)
14. Science / C. Induction / 4. Reason in Induction
Induction moves from some truths to similar ones, by contraries or consequents [Diog. Laertius]
     Full Idea: Induction is an argument which by means of some admitted truths establishes naturally other truths which resemble them; there are two kinds, one proceeding from contraries, the other from consequents.
     From: Diogenes Laertius (Lives of Eminent Philosophers [c.250], 3.1.23)
14. Science / C. Induction / 5. Paradoxes of Induction / b. Raven paradox
Observing irrelevant items supports both 'all x are y' and 'all x are non-y', revealing its absurdity [Schofield,J]
     Full Idea: Although Hempel's raven paradox produces an absurdity of irrelevant observations, we can ignore it because (unlike good observations) observing a white handbag supports the contradictions of 'ravens are black' and 'ravens are non-black'.
     From: Jonathan Schofield (talk [2005]), quoted by PG - Db (ideas)
     A reaction: The idea of 'eliminating it from our enquiries' cannot be totally irrational (e.g. in detective work), but it is only seriously sensible in a restricted domain (such as a country house)
22. Metaethics / C. The Good / 3. Pleasure / b. Types of pleasure
Cyrenaic pleasure is a motion, but Epicurean pleasure is a condition [Diog. Laertius]
     Full Idea: Cyrenaics place pleasure wholly in motion, whereas Epicurus admits it as a condition.
     From: Diogenes Laertius (Lives of Eminent Philosophers [c.250], 10.28)
     A reaction: Not a distinction we meet in modern discussions. Do events within the mind count as 'motion'? If so, these two agree. If not, I'd vote for Epicurus.
23. Ethics / A. Egoism / 1. Ethical Egoism
Cynics believe that when a man wishes for nothing he is like the gods [Diog. Laertius]
     Full Idea: Cynics believe that when a man wishes for nothing he is like the gods.
     From: Diogenes Laertius (Lives of Eminent Philosophers [c.250], 6.Men.3)
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 6. Liberalism / g. Liberalism critique
Liberalism may fail because it neglects the shared nature of what we pursue and protect [Haldane]
     Full Idea: I am interested in the claim that liberalism fails inasmuch as it neglects, and cannot accommodate, the fact that some or all of the goods we pursue, and which a system of rights is concerned to protect, are goods possessed in common.
     From: John Haldane (The Individual, the State, and the Common Good [1996], III)
     A reaction: It depends how individualistic we take liberalism to be. Extreme individualism (Nozick) strikes me as crazy. If 'we' erect a statue to some dubious politicians, it might be presented as a common good, but actually be despised by many.