Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Marcel Proust, G. Aldo Antonelli and Paul Johnson

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


27 ideas

2. Reason / E. Argument / 1. Argument
You can 'rebut' an argument's conclusion, or 'undercut' its premises [Antonelli]
     Full Idea: A 'rebut' of an argument establishes that its conclusion is not the case. An 'undercut' of the argument shows that the premises do not support that conclusion.
     From: G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 3.2)
4. Formal Logic / E. Nonclassical Logics / 1. Nonclassical Logics
We infer that other objects are like some exceptional object, if they share some of its properties [Antonelli]
     Full Idea: The exceptional status of an object with respect to some default is more likely to spread to other objects if they share properties with that object that may play a role in explaining the exceptional status.
     From: G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 4)
     A reaction: This is an example of the sort of rational behaviour we exhibit, and which a 'real life' logic would somehow need to capture. I would suggest the essentialist logic designed by Kit Fine as a first port of call.
4. Formal Logic / E. Nonclassical Logics / 12. Non-Monotonic Logic
Reasoning may be defeated by new premises, or by finding out more about the given ones [Antonelli]
     Full Idea: Most defeasible reasoning is externally dynamic, affected by the addition of further premises. But there is also an internal (or 'diachronic') dynamic, when further analysis reveals more about the given premises.
     From: G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 1)
Should we accept Floating Conclusions, derived from two arguments in conflict? [Antonelli]
     Full Idea: There is much discussion of whether Floating Conclusions should be derived, given that they were derived from two arguments which conflict with one another.
     From: G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 2.3)
Weakest Link Principle: prefer the argument whose weakest link is the stronger [Antonelli]
     Full Idea: In the Weakest Link Principle, an argument is preferred to another conflicting argument if its weakest defeasible link is stronger than the weakest defeasible link in the conflicting argument.
     From: G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 2.1)
     A reaction: [He cites John Pollock 1991] This sounds like the elementary principle applied when choosing a rope by which to hang a large weight above your head. It gets non-monotonic logic off the ground - if you know how to evaluate 'weakest'.
Non-monotonic core: Reflexivity, Cut, Cautious Monotonicity, Left Logical Equivalence, Right Weakening [Antonelli]
     Full Idea: Conservative core of non-monotonic logic:Reflexivity (p proves p), Cut (if p proves q, it proves their joint implications), Cautious Monotonicity, Left Logical Equivalence (equivalences have same consequences), Right Weakening (non-m preserves classical).
     From: G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 3.5.1)
     A reaction: [Highly compressed, and without symbols]
We can rank a formula by the level of surprise if it were to hold [Antonelli]
     Full Idea: We can think of an 'ordinal ranking function' κ([φ)] as the level of surprise we would face were φ to hold, up to maximal surprise.
     From: G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 3.5.2)
     A reaction: This suggests that Bayes's Theorem might be relevant to non-monotonic logic. This suggests that registering surprise would need to be an important feature of robot behaviour.
People don't actually use classical logic, but may actually use non-monotonic logic [Antonelli]
     Full Idea: Test subjects seem to perform very poorly in various reasoning tests (Wason Selection, Suppression Task), suggesting logic has a subordinate role, but this may be using classical logic, where non-monotonic logics would be more appropriate.
     From: G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 4)
     A reaction: Fred Sommers presents his Term Logic (based on Aristotle) as closer to how people actually reason. It is certainly crazy to infer that most people's everyday reasoning is irrational. Induction is highly rational; it's just not deductive.
5. Theory of Logic / K. Features of Logics / 10. Monotonicity
In classical logic the relation |= has Monotony built into its definition [Antonelli]
     Full Idea: In classical logic, Monotony follows immediately from the nature of the relation |=, for Γ |= φ holds precisely when φ is true on every interpretation on which all sentences in Γ are true.
     From: G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 1)
     A reaction: That is, semantic consequence (|=) is defined in terms of a sentence (φ) always being true if some other bunch of sentences (Γ) are true. Hence the addition of further sentences to Γ will make no difference - which is Monotony.
Cautious Monotony ignores proved additions; Rational Monotony fails if the addition's negation is proved [Antonelli]
     Full Idea: Basic Monotony: something stays proved if further premises are added. Cautious Monotony: the addition of something which has been proved makes no difference. Rational Monotony: it stays proved as long as the addition's negation hasn't been proved.
     From: G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 1)
     A reaction: [A compressed and non-symbolic summary]
18. Thought / B. Mechanics of Thought / 3. Modularity of Mind
When we need to do something, we depute an inner servant to remind us of it [Proust]
     Full Idea: Whenever we have something definite to do at a given moment, we depute a certain person inside us who is accustomed to that sort of duty to keep an eye on the clock and warn us of the time. This inner servant reminded me that Albertine was coming soon.
     From: Marcel Proust (Remembrance of Things Past [1922], Cities.2.1)
     A reaction: I think Proust is wrong that we 'depute' this servant. I think it comes as a built-in feature, and the servant could never be abandoned or sacked, no matter how poor the service. Each of us is a team, which includes servants.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 10. Theocracy
In Mosaic legal theory, crimes are sins and sins are crimes [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: In Mosaic legal theory, all breaches of the law offend God. All crimes are sins, just as all sins are crimes.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt I)
     A reaction: This would seem to define Josephus called a 'theocracy'. Not just rule by a priesthood, but also an attempt to make civil law coincide with the teachings of sacred texts. But doing 80 m.p.h. on a motorway at 2 a.m. hardly seems like a sin.
Because human life is what is sacred, Mosaic law has no death penalty for property violations [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: Where other codes provided the death penalty for offences against property, in Mosaic law no property offence is capital; human life is too sacred, where the rights of property alone are violated.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt I)
     A reaction: We still preserve this idea in our law, and also in our culture, where we are keen to insist that catastrophes like earthquakes or major fires are measured almost entirely by the loss of life, not the loss of property. I approve.
25. Social Practice / A. Freedoms / 1. Slavery
The Pharisees undermined slavery, by giving slaves responsibility and status in law courts [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: It is no accident that slavery among Jews disappeared with the rise of the Pharisees, as they insisted that all were equal before God in a court. Masters were no longer responsible for actions of slaves, so a slave had status, and slavery could not work.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt II)
     A reaction: As in seventeenth century England, the rise of social freedom comes from religious sources, not social sources. A slave has status in the transcendent world of souls, despite being a nobody in the physical world.
25. Social Practice / B. Equalities / 3. Legal equality
Mosaic law was the first to embody the rule of law, and equality before the law [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: Mosaic law meant that God ruled through his laws, and since all were equally subject to the law, the system was the first to embody the double merits of the rule of law and equality before the law.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt I)
     A reaction: If this is correct, it seems to be a hugely important step, combined with Idea 1659, that revenge should be the action of a the state, not of the individual. They are the few simple and essential keys to civilization.
25. Social Practice / F. Life Issues / 1. Causing Death
Man's life is sacred, because it is made in God's image [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: In Mosaic theology, man is made in God's image, and so his life is not just valuable, it is sacred.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt I)
     A reaction: The obvious question is what exactly is meant by "in God's image". Physically, spiritually, intellectually, morally? I am guessing that the original idea was intellectual, because we are the only rational animal. The others seem unlikely, or arrogant.
29. Religion / A. Polytheistic Religion / 2. Greek Polytheism
The Jews sharply distinguish human and divine, but the Greeks pull them closer together [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: The Jews drew an absolute distinction between the human and the divine; the Greeks constantly elevated the human - they were Promethean - and lowered the divine.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt II)
     A reaction: An intriguing observation. The Greek idea runs right through European culture, surfacing (for example) in 'Faust', or 'Frankenstein', or the films of James Cameron. I'm with the Greeks; I want to see how far humanity can be elevated.
29. Religion / B. Monotheistic Religion / 2. Judaism
A key moment is the idea of a single moral God, who imposes his morality on humanity [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: The discovery of monotheism, and not just of monotheism but of a sole, omnipotent God actuated by ethical principles and seeking methodically to impose them on human beings, is one of the greatest turning-points in history, perhaps the greatest of all.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt I)
     A reaction: 'Discovery' begs some questions, but when put like this you realise what a remarkable event it was. It is a good candidate for the most influential idea ever, even if large chunks of humanity, especially in the orient, never took to monotheism.
Sampson illustrates the idea that religious heroes often begin as outlaws and semi-criminals [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: Sampson is the outstanding example of the point which the Book of Judges makes again and again, that the Lord and society are often served by semi-criminal types, outlaws and misfits, who become folk-heroes and then religious heroes.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt I)
     A reaction: This illustrates nicely Nietzsche's claim, that the jews were responsible for his 'inversion of values', in which aristocratic virtues are downgraded, and the virtues of a good slave are elevated (though Sampson may not show that point so well!).
Isaiah moved Israelite religion away from the local, onto a more universal plane [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: The works of Isaiah (740-700 BCE) mark the point at which the Israelite religion began to spiritualize itself, to move from a specific location in space and time on to the universalist plane.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt I)
     A reaction: This is necessary if any religion is going to make converts outside the local culture. The crucial step would be to disembody God, so that He cannot be represented by a statue. The difficulty is for him to be universal, but retain a 'chosen people'.
The Torah pre-existed creation, and was its blueprint [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: The Torah was not just a book about God. It pre-existed creation, in the same way as God did. In fact, it was the blueprint of creation.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt III)
     A reaction: You can only become a 'people of the book' (which Moslems resented in Judaism, and then emulated) if you give this stupendously high status to your book. Hence Christian fundamentalism makes sense, with its emphasis on the divinity of the Bible.
Judaism involves circumcision, Sabbath, Passover, Pentecost, Tabernacles, New Year, and Atonement [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: The practices of Judaism developed during their Exile: circumcision, the Sabbath, the Passover (founding of the nation), Pentecost (giving of the laws), the Tabernacles, the New Year, and the Day of Atonement.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt II)
     A reaction: These were the elements of ritual created to replace the existence of a physically located state. An astonishing achievement, not even remotely achieved by any other state that was driven off its lands. A culture is an idea, not a country.
In exile the Jews became a nomocracy [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: In exile the Jews, deprived of a state, became a nomocracy - voluntarily submitting to rule by a Law which could only be enforced by consent. Nothing like this had occurred before in history.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt II)
     A reaction: It is the most remarkable case in history of a people united and strengthened by adversity, and it became an important experiment in the building of human cultures. But what is the point of preserving a culture, with no land? Why not just integrate?
29. Religion / B. Monotheistic Religion / 3. Zoroastrianism
Zoroastrians believed in one eternal beneficent being, Creator through the holy spirit [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: Cyrus the Great was a Zoroastrian, believing in one, eternal, beneficent being, 'Creator of all things through the holy spirit'.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt II)
     A reaction: Is this the actual origin of monotheism, or did they absorb this idea from the Jews? The interesting bit is the fact that the supreme being (called Marduk) is 'beneficent', which one doesn't associate with these remote and supposed pagans.
29. Religion / D. Religious Issues / 2. Immortality / a. Immortality
Immortality based on judgement of merit was developed by the Egyptians (not the Jews) [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: The idea of judgement at death and immortality on the basis of merit were developed in Egypt before 1000 BCE. It is not Jewish because it was not in the Torah, and the Sadducees, who stuck to their texts, seemed to have denied the afterlife completely.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt II)
     A reaction: This is the idea considered crucial to religion by Immanuel Kant (Idea 1455), who should be declared an honorary Egyptian. To me the idea that only the good go to heaven sounds like sadly wishful thinking - a fictional consolation for an unhappy life.
The main doctrine of the Pharisees was belief in resurrection and the afterlife [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: Belief in resurrection and the afterlife was the main distinguishing mark of Pharisaism, and thus fundamental of rabbinic Judaism.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt II)
     A reaction: Belief in an afterlife seems to go back to the Egyptians, but this development in Judaism was obviously very influential, even among early Christians, who initially seem to have only believed in resurrection of the body.
29. Religion / D. Religious Issues / 2. Immortality / d. Heaven
Pious Jews saw heaven as a vast library [Johnson,P]
     Full Idea: Pious Jews saw heaven as a vast library, with the Archangel Metatron as the librarian: the books in the shelves there pressed themselves together to make room for a newcomer.
     From: Paul Johnson (The History of the Jews [1987], Pt III)
     A reaction: I'm tempted to convert to Judaism.