Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Proclus, Rod Girle and Robert C. Solomon

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


43 ideas

1. Philosophy / A. Wisdom / 1. Nature of Wisdom
Wisdom needs both thought and passion, with each reflecting on the other [Solomon]
     Full Idea: Wisdom is a matter of living both thoughtfully and passionately, bringing understanding to bear on every passion and forcing every passion into the light of reflection.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 3.4)
     A reaction: His main point is that passion is a key part of wisdom, and the idea that wisdom is cold and detached is quite false. Good point. At the very least, wise people must relate sympathetically to others.
1. Philosophy / E. Nature of Metaphysics / 3. Metaphysical Systems
Philosophy is creating an intellectual conceptual structure for life [Solomon]
     Full Idea: Philosophy is conceptual sculpture, the shaping and developing of the intellectual structures within which we live our lives.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], Intro.1)
     A reaction: Nice. I tend to see philosophy as conceptual analysis (though creating new concepts doesn't quite fit that), but the vision of creating a huge conceptual sculpture sounds good. I would call it a system. (See my book, 'Natural Ideas'!).
2. Reason / A. Nature of Reason / 1. On Reason
Reason is actually passions, guided by perspicacious reflection [Solomon]
     Full Idea: What is called 'reason' is the passions enlightened, 'illuminated' by reflection and supported by a perspicacious deliberation that the emotions in their urgency normally excluded.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], Intro.4)
     A reaction: To suggest that reason more or less is emotions strikes me as missing the point of 'perspicacious', which takes in facts outside our emotional world. We excitedly climb a cliff, then stop when we see the rocks are crumbling.
4. Formal Logic / B. Propositional Logic PL / 1. Propositional Logic
Propositional logic handles negation, disjunction, conjunction; predicate logic adds quantifiers, predicates, relations [Girle]
     Full Idea: Propositional logic can deal with negation, disjunction and conjunction of propositions, but predicate logic goes beyond it to deal with quantifiers, predicates and relations.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 1.1)
     A reaction: This is on the first page of an introduction to the next stage, which is to include modal notions like 'must' and 'possibly'.
There are three axiom schemas for propositional logic [Girle]
     Full Idea: The axioms of propositional logic are: A→(B→A); A→(B→C)→(A→B)→(A→C) ; and (¬A→¬B)→(B→A).
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 6.5)
4. Formal Logic / B. Propositional Logic PL / 2. Tools of Propositional Logic / a. Symbols of PL
Proposition logic has definitions for its three operators: or, and, and identical [Girle]
     Full Idea: The operators of propositional logic are defined as follows: 'or' (v) is not-A implies B; 'and' (ampersand) is not A-implies-not-B; and 'identity' (three line equals) is A-implies-B and B-implies-A.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 6.5)
4. Formal Logic / B. Propositional Logic PL / 2. Tools of Propositional Logic / e. Axioms of PL
Axiom systems of logic contain axioms, inference rules, and definitions of proof and theorems [Girle]
     Full Idea: An axiom system for a logic contains three elements: a set of axioms; a set of inference rules; and definitions for proofs and theorems. There are also definitions for the derivation of conclusions from sets of premises.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 6.5)
4. Formal Logic / D. Modal Logic ML / 3. Modal Logic Systems / g. System S4
There are seven modalities in S4, each with its negation [Girle]
     Full Idea: In S4 there are fourteen modalities: no-operator; necessarily; possibly; necessarily-possibly; possibly-necessarily; necessarily-possibly-necessarily; and possibly-necessarily-possibly (each with its negation).
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 3.5)
     A reaction: This is said to be 'more complex' than S5, but also 'weaker'.
4. Formal Logic / D. Modal Logic ML / 3. Modal Logic Systems / h. System S5
◊p → □◊p is the hallmark of S5 [Girle]
     Full Idea: The critical formula that distinguishes S5 from all others is: ◊p → □◊p.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 3.3)
     A reaction: If it is possible that it is raining, then it is necessary that it is possible that it is raining. But if it is possible in this world, how can that possibility be necessary in all possible worlds?
S5 has just six modalities, and all strings can be reduced to those [Girle]
     Full Idea: In S5 there are six modalities: no-operator; necessarily; and possibly (and their negations). In any sequence of operators we may delete all but the last to gain an equivalent formula.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 3.5)
     A reaction: Such drastic simplification seems attractive. Is there really no difference, though, between 'necessarily-possibly', 'possibly-possibly' and just 'possibly'? Could p be contingently possible in this world, and necessarily possible in another?
4. Formal Logic / D. Modal Logic ML / 4. Alethic Modal Logic
Possible worlds logics use true-in-a-world rather than true [Girle]
     Full Idea: In possible worlds logics a statement is true-in-a-world rather than just true.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 1.1)
     A reaction: This sounds relativist, but I don't think it is. It is the facts which change, not the concept of truth. So 'donkeys can talk' may be true in a world, but not in the actual one.
Modal logic has four basic modal negation equivalences [Girle]
     Full Idea: The four important logical equivalences in modal logic (the Modal Negation equivalences) are: ¬◊p↔□¬p, ◊¬p↔¬□p, □p↔¬◊¬p, and ◊p↔¬□¬p.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 1.2)
     A reaction: [Possibly is written as a diamond, necessarily a square] These are parallel to a set of equivalences between quantifiers in predicate logic. They are called the four 'modal negation (MN) equivalences'.
Modal logics were studied in terms of axioms, but now possible worlds semantics is added [Girle]
     Full Idea: Modal logics were, for a long time, studied in terms of axiom systems. The advent of possible worlds semantics made it possible to study them in a semantic way as well.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 6.5)
5. Theory of Logic / B. Logical Consequence / 7. Strict Implication
Necessary implication is called 'strict implication'; if successful, it is called 'entailment' [Girle]
     Full Idea: Necessary implication is often called 'strict implication'. The sort of strict implication found in valid arguments, where the conjunction of the premises necessarily implies the conclusion, is often called 'entailment'.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 1.2)
     A reaction: These are basic concept for all logic.
5. Theory of Logic / H. Proof Systems / 5. Tableau Proof
If an argument is invalid, a truth tree will indicate a counter-example [Girle]
     Full Idea: The truth trees method for establishing the validity of arguments and formulas is easy to use, and has the advantage that if an argument or formula is not valid, then a counter-example can be retrieved from the tree.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 1.4)
10. Modality / A. Necessity / 3. Types of Necessity
Analytic truths are divided into logically and conceptually necessary [Girle]
     Full Idea: It has been customary to see analytic truths as dividing into the logically necessary and the conceptually necessary.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 7.3)
     A reaction: I suspect that this neglected distinction is important in discussions of Quine's elimination of the analytic/synthetic distinction. Was Quine too influenced by what is logically necessary, which might shift with a change of axioms?
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 1. Possibility
Possibilities can be logical, theoretical, physical, economic or human [Girle]
     Full Idea: Qualified modalities seem to form a hierarchy, if we say that 'the possibility that there might be no hunger' is possible logically, theoretically, physically, economically, and humanly.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 7.3)
     A reaction: Girle also mentions conceptual possibility. I take 'physically' to be the same as 'naturally'. I would take 'metaphysically' possible to equate to 'theoretically' rather than 'logically'. Almost anything might be logically possible, with bizarre logic.
10. Modality / E. Possible worlds / 1. Possible Worlds / a. Possible worlds
A world has 'access' to a world it generates, which is important in possible worlds semantics [Girle]
     Full Idea: When one world generates another then it has 'access' to the world it generated. The accessibility relation between worlds is very important in possible worlds semantics.
     From: Rod Girle (Modal Logics and Philosophy [2000], 3.2)
     A reaction: This invites the obvious question what is meant by 'generates'.
12. Knowledge Sources / E. Direct Knowledge / 2. Intuition
We often trust our intuitions as rational, despite their lack of reflection [Solomon]
     Full Idea: We trust certain rational 'intuitions' in ourselves which dispense with reflection but seem to follow an indisputable logic. (note: it is thought ineffable because reflection is the paradigm of rationality. It is no less rational than reflection).
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 6.4)
     A reaction: [compressed] Solomon uses the example to support that emotion is part of rationality. Since this view of intuition is more or less mine (that intuition can be knowledge, when the justification is obscure), it seems to support his claim.
14. Science / D. Explanation / 2. Types of Explanation / g. Causal explanations
Geometrical proofs do not show causes, as when we prove a triangle contains two right angles [Proclus]
     Full Idea: Geometry does not ask 'why?' ..When from the exterior angle equalling two opposite interior angles it is shown that the interior angles make two right angles, this is not a causal demonstration. With no exterior angle they still equal two right angles.
     From: Proclus (Commentary on Euclid's 'Elements' [c.452], p.161-2), quoted by Paolo Mancosu - Explanation in Mathematics §5
     A reaction: A very nice example. It is hard to imagine how one might demonstrate the cause of the angles making two right angles. If you walk, turn left x°, then turn left y°, then turn left z°, and x+y+z=180°, you end up going in the original direction.
15. Nature of Minds / C. Capacities of Minds / 1. Faculties
Distinguishing reason from passion is based on an archaic 'faculty' theory [Solomon]
     Full Idea: The distinction between reason and passion is based on an archaic 'faculty' psychology of the human soul.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], Intro.2)
     A reaction: I like faculties, for philosophical purposes, as explanatory tools to account for our metaphysical and conceptual framework, but this point is well made. The danger is that we impose sharp divisions, where reality is more complex.
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 3. Emotions / a. Nature of emotions
I say bodily chemistry and its sensations have nothing to do with emotions [Solomon]
     Full Idea: I shall be making the claim (sujectively) that the chemistry of the body and the sensations caused by that chemistry have nothing to do with the emotions.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 4.1)
     A reaction: Surely an unexpected stabbing pain causes fear? Isn't pain supposed to trigger appropriate emotions? That is not to say that emotions are a feature of body chemistry.
Emotions are judgements about ourselves, and our place in the world [Solomon]
     Full Idea: An emotion is a basic judgement about our Selves and our place in the world, the projection of the values and ideals, structures and mythologies
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 5.3)
     A reaction: Solomon's main theory. What about the Frege-Geach problem - that I feel emotions (and judgements) about fictions and remote events, in which my personal concerns and involvement are zero? Presumably these emotions are parasitic on his primary type?
Emotions are defined by their objects [Solomon]
     Full Idea: Direction, scope and focus set the stage, but the specific object is what defines the emotion.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 7.3)
     A reaction: This is presumably the main distinction between an emotion and a mood. He emphasises that the objects are subjective, rather than factual.
The heart of an emotion is its judgement of values and morality [Solomon]
     Full Idea: The heart of every emotion is its value judgements, its appraisals of gain and loss, its indictment of offences and its praise of virtue, its often Manichean judgement of 'good' and 'evil'.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 7.6)
     A reaction: He adds blame and excuse. Some of our strongest emotions can just be identifications, rather than judgements, as when we learn of someone else's triumph or disaster. On the whole I agree, though. This is important for Aristotelian virtue theory.
Emotions can be analysed under fifteen headings [Solomon]
     Full Idea: Emotions can be analysed by direction, scope/focus, object, criteria, status, evaluations, responsibility, intersubjectivity, distance, mythology, desire, power, strategy.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 8)
     A reaction: These are the headings Solomon actually applies in his breakdown of most of the main emotions. See his book for explanations of each of them. If people say philosophy makes no progress, I'd at least point to helpful thinking of this kind.
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 3. Emotions / b. Types of emotion
Some emotions are externally directed, others internally [Solomon]
     Full Idea: 'Outer-directed' emotions (such as fear) are about particular situations, objects, or other people. …The 'inner-directed' emotions (such as vanity or regret) take one's Self as their focal point.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 7.1)
     A reaction: This is Solomon's own distinction. Some of the emotions he cites, such as vanity, seem to me more like long term virtues or vices, rather than emotions. He did say, though, that you can have emotions without feeling, such as long-term hate.
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 3. Emotions / c. Role of emotions
It is only our passions which give our lives meaning [Solomon]
     Full Idea: It is our passions, and our passions alone, which provide our lives with meaning.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], Pref)
     A reaction: This presumably entails that the lives of plants have no meaning. It also seems to be rather egotistical, since it is not clear why anyone else's life should have meaning for me, if I don't directly experience their passions. Interesting, though.
Which emotions we feel depends on our sense of our own powers [Solomon]
     Full Idea: An emotion depends on an estimation of our own power. If a lover is jealous they welcome confrontation, but if they are just envious they assume impotence from the start.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 7.12)
     A reaction: This seems particularly true of politics, where the possibility (or not) of influencing events makes a huge difference. We can picture a huge variety of emotions when a fight breaks out in public.
The passions are subjective, concerning what is important to me, rather than facts [Solomon]
     Full Idea: The passions are uniquely subjective, although they sometimes pretend to have a certain objective status. They are not concerned with the world, but with my world. They are not concerned with 'the facts', but with what is important.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], Intro.5)
     A reaction: Values pick out what is 'important'. This idea sums up Solomon's rather solipsistic view of emotions. I accept that emotions are responses, rather than objective judgements, but there is objectivity in their social dimension. Why care about politics?
Emotions are strategies for maximising our sense of dignity and self-esteem [Solomon]
     Full Idea: Every emotion is a strategy, a purposive attempt to structure our world in such a way as to maximise our sense of personal dignity and self-esteem.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], Pref)
     A reaction: This is the main thesis of Solomon's book. There doesn't seem to be much to admire in what he takes to be our chief motivation. I would put a much more social spin on it - that our underlying urge is not self-promotion, but to fit into a community.
Passions exist as emotions, moods and desires, which all generate meaning [Solomon]
     Full Idea: There are three fundamental species passions - emotions, moods, and desires. …What all passions have in common is their ability to bestow meaning to the circumstances of our lives.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 3.2)
     A reaction: Moods are said to be 'generalised emotions', where emotions are about something, and desires add objectives. Solomon criticises rigid divisions between mental faculties and states, but it is hard to disagree with this distinction.
The Myth of the Passions says they are irrational, uncontrolled and damaging [Solomon]
     Full Idea: The Myth of the Passions says emotions are irrational forces beyond our control, disruptive and stupid, unthinking and counterproductive, against our 'better interests', and often ridiculous.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 6.4)
     A reaction: The Myth is very unlikely to be correct, for evolutionary reasons. How could there be a selection for a mental feature which distorts truths and leads to dangerous misjudgements? Most emotions motivate us to act successfully. So why do some run wild?
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 3. Emotions / d. Emotional feeling
Feeling is a superficial aspect of emotion, and may be indeterminate, or even absent [Solomon]
     Full Idea: Feeling is the ornamentation of emotion, not its essence. ...For example, what is the difference in feeling between embarrassment and shame? …We may also experience an emotion like subdued anger or envy with no feeling.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 4.2)
     A reaction: This is very persuasive, and supports the idea that what matters in an emotion is its content, rather than its phenomenology. He adds later that we are often mistaken about our own emotions.
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 3. Emotions / e. Basic emotions
There are no 'basic' emotions, only socially prevalent ones [Solomon]
     Full Idea: There are no 'basic' emotions, only those emotions which are prevalent in a particular society. This reduction to a small set makes it impossible to appreciate the richness of our emotional lives.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 8)
     A reaction: He cites Descartes as a culprit, and John Watson's famous list of fear, dependency and rage. I think Solomon is probably right. He suggests that the lists are usually individualistic and negative. Individuals may have their private basics!
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 3. Emotions / f. Emotion and reason
It is reason which needs the anchorage of passions, rather than vice versa [Solomon]
     Full Idea: It is not the passions who require the controls and rationalisations of reason. Rather, it is reason that requires the anchorage and earthy wisdom of the passions.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], Pref)
     A reaction: I like the second half of this. We don't just follow the winds of arguments; we decide into which of the many conflicting winds we should steer the rational arguments, and that needs passions. Only a fool doesn't rationally control their passions.
Dividing ourselves into confrontational reason and passion destroys our harmonious whole [Solomon]
     Full Idea: To divide the soul into reason and passion …divides us against ourselves, forcing us each to be defensively half a person, instead of a harmonious whole.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 2.3)
     A reaction: This is the best aspect of Solomon's book. I'm not sure, though, how this works in practice. Should I allow the winds of emotion to alter the course of my reasoning, or stunt my feelings by always insisting that reason plays a part? That's too dualist!
The supposed irrationality of our emotions is often tactless or faulty expression of them [Solomon]
     Full Idea: What is often called the 'irrationality' of our emotions is rather the faulty timing or inept choice of their expressions.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 6.4)
     A reaction: The irrationality can be pretty obvious when having a tantrum over trivia, or resenting some tiny slight, or falling in love with a dead film star. That said, his point is well made.
18. Thought / E. Abstraction / 1. Abstract Thought
The origin of geometry started in sensation, then moved to calculation, and then to reason [Proclus]
     Full Idea: It is unsurprising that geometry was discovered in the necessity of Nile land measurement, since everything in the world of generation goes from imperfection to perfection. They would naturally pass from sense-perception to calculation, and so to reason.
     From: Proclus (Commentary on Euclid's 'Elements' [c.452]), quoted by Charles Chihara - A Structural Account of Mathematics 9.12 n55
     A reaction: The last sentence is the core of my view on abstraction, that it proceeds by moving through levels of abstraction, approaching more and more general truths.
22. Metaethics / B. Value / 1. Nature of Value / d. Subjective value
Emotions are our life force, and the source of most of our values [Solomon]
     Full Idea: Emotions are the life force of the soul, the source of most of our values (not all: there is always hunger, thirst, and fatigue).
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], Intro.4)
     A reaction: I am beginning to worry that Solomon's account is too individual and subjective. My personal values may derive from my emotions, but I think human and social values are based much more on objective observations and facts. We are social, not solipsists.
22. Metaethics / B. Value / 2. Values / g. Love
Lovers adopt the interests of their beloved, rather than just valuing them [Solomon]
     Full Idea: It is often said that love takes the interests of the lover as being more important than one's own; but here again we would rather say that love takes the lovers interests as its own.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 7.9)
     A reaction: This is because he sees emotions as almost entirely self-centred, and almost never altruistic. To me the evolutionary picture suggest a more social view. Many people want the lives of their ex- to go well, without knowing their new interests.
23. Ethics / F. Existentialism / 2. Nihilism
'Absurdity' is just the result of our wrong choices in life [Solomon]
     Full Idea: The 'absurdity of life' is nothing than our own unsatisfactory choices, typically of defensiveness and resentment, competition, and 'meaningless' routines.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], Pref)
     A reaction: He seems to have Camus particularly in mind. He sees love and co-operation as the cure. I sort of agree, but somewhere in all of our minds there lurks an abyss, with the good life looking like a distraction from it.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 1. Ideology
Ideologies are mythologies which guide our actions [Solomon]
     Full Idea: Mythologies become ideologies when we play a role in them, live in them, take action and take sides.
     From: Robert C. Solomon (The Passions [1976], 6.1)
     A reaction: This may well be a sceptical American attitude to ideology, since 'mythology' implies a fiction. But I think for most of us there exists the possibility of a good ideology, which correctly points us towards a better life. Dangerous things, though!