Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'The Poetics', 'A Critique of Utilitarianism' and 'Interview with Baggini and Stangroom'

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


13 ideas

1. Philosophy / H. Continental Philosophy / 1. Continental Philosophy
Analytic philosophy has much higher standards of thinking than continental philosophy [Williamson]
     Full Idea: Certain advances in philosophical standards have been made within analytic philosophy, and there would be a serious loss of integrity involved in abandoning them in the way required to participate in current continental philosophy.
     From: Timothy Williamson (Interview with Baggini and Stangroom [2001], p.151)
     A reaction: The reply might be to concede the point, but say that the precision and rigour achieved are precisely what debar analytical philosophy from thinking about the really interesting problems. One might as well switch to maths and have done with it.
4. Formal Logic / E. Nonclassical Logics / 4. Fuzzy Logic
Fuzzy logic uses a continuum of truth, but it implies contradictions [Williamson]
     Full Idea: Fuzzy logic is based on a continuum of degrees of truth, but it is committed to the idea that it is half-true that one identical twin is tall and the other twin is not, even though they are the same height.
     From: Timothy Williamson (Interview with Baggini and Stangroom [2001], p.154)
     A reaction: Maybe to be shocked by a contradiction is missing the point of fuzzy logic? Half full is the same as half empty. The logic does not say the twins are different, because it is half-true that they are both tall, and half-true that they both aren't.
5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 3. Value of Logic
Formal logic struck me as exactly the language I wanted to think in [Williamson]
     Full Idea: As soon as I started learning formal logic, that struck me as exactly the language that I wanted to think in.
     From: Timothy Williamson (Interview with Baggini and Stangroom [2001])
     A reaction: It takes all sorts… It is interesting that formal logic might be seen as having the capacity to live up to such an aspiration. I don't think the dream of an ideal formal language is dead, though it will never encompass all of reality. Poetic truth.
7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 10. Vagueness / c. Vagueness as ignorance
Close to conceptual boundaries judgement is too unreliable to give knowledge [Williamson]
     Full Idea: If one is very close to a conceptual boundary, then one's judgement will be too unreliable to constitute knowledge, and therefore one will be ignorant.
     From: Timothy Williamson (Interview with Baggini and Stangroom [2001], p.156)
     A reaction: This is the epistemological rather than ontological interpretation of vagueness. It sounds very persuasive, but I am reluctant to accept that reality is full of very precise boundaries which we cannot quite discriminate.
9. Objects / B. Unity of Objects / 3. Unity Problems / e. Vague objects
What sort of logic is needed for vague concepts, and what sort of concept of truth? [Williamson]
     Full Idea: The problem of vagueness is the problem of what logic is correct for vague concepts, and correspondingly what notions of truth and falsity are applicable to vague statements (does one need a continuum of degrees of truth, for example?).
     From: Timothy Williamson (Interview with Baggini and Stangroom [2001], p.153)
     A reaction: This certainly makes vagueness sound like one of the most interesting problems in all of philosophy, though also one of the most difficult. Williamson's solution is that we may be vague, but the world isn't.
10. Modality / B. Possibility / 1. Possibility
The actual must be possible, because it occurred [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: Actual events are evidently possible, otherwise they would not have occurred.
     From: Aristotle (The Poetics [c.347 BCE], 1451b18)
     A reaction: [quoted online by Peter Adamson] Seems like common sense, but it's important to have Aristotle assert it.
12. Knowledge Sources / B. Perception / 1. Perception
How can one discriminate yellow from red, but not the colours in between? [Williamson]
     Full Idea: If one takes a spectrum of colours from yellow to red, it might be that given a series of colour samples along that spectrum, each sample is indiscriminable by the naked eye from the next one, though samples at either end are blatantly different.
     From: Timothy Williamson (Interview with Baggini and Stangroom [2001], p.151)
     A reaction: This seems like a nice variant of the Sorites paradox (Idea 6008). One could demonstrate it with just three samples, where A and C seemed different from each other, but other comparisons didn't.
21. Aesthetics / B. Nature of Art / 8. The Arts / b. Literature
Poetry is more philosophic than history, as it concerns universals, not particulars [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: Poetry is something more philosophic and of graver import than history, since its statements are rather of universals, whereas those of history are singulars.
     From: Aristotle (The Poetics [c.347 BCE], 1451b05)
     A reaction: Hm. Characters in great novels achieve universality by being representated very particularly. Great depth of mind seems required to be a poet, but less so for a historian (though there is, I presume, no upward limit on the possible level of thought).
22. Metaethics / B. Value / 1. Nature of Value / f. Ultimate value
Maybe the unthinkable is a moral category, and considering some options is dishonourable or absurd [Williams,B]
     Full Idea: One might have the idea that the unthinkable was itself a moral category. ...Regarding certain things even as alternatives is itself something to be regarded as dishonourable or morally absurd.
     From: Bernard Williams (A Critique of Utilitarianism [1973], 2)
     A reaction: He's very tentative about this, but I think it is a powerful moral idea. See Kekes. He is particularly aiming at utilitarians, who happily assess vile possibilities.
22. Metaethics / C. The Good / 1. Goodness / g. Consequentialism
Consequentialism assumes that situations can be compared [Williams,B]
     Full Idea: The emphasis on the necessary comparability of situations is a peculiar feature of consequentialism in general.
     From: Bernard Williams (A Critique of Utilitarianism [1973], 2)
     A reaction: A nice point. Utilitarians might achieve comparison by totting up the happiness in each situation, but once you include the consequences of the consequences the problems are obvious. Was 1789 a good thing? Too early to say.
For a consequentialist massacring 7 million must be better than massacring 7 million and one [Williams,B]
     Full Idea: Making the best of a bad job is a consequentialist maxim, and it will have something to say even pn the difference between massacring seven million and massacring seven million and one.
     From: Bernard Williams (A Critique of Utilitarianism [1973], 2)
     A reaction: If every life counts, the consequentialists have got something right here. Not caring exactly how many were massacred is a sort of callousness (even when the number can't be established).
23. Ethics / D. Deontological Ethics / 3. Universalisability
We don't have a duty to ensure that others do their duty [Williams,B]
     Full Idea: If the goodness of the world were to consist in people's fulfilling their obligations, it would by no means follow that one of my obligations was to bring it about that other people kept their obligations
     From: Bernard Williams (A Critique of Utilitarianism [1973], 2)
     A reaction: If the maxim of my action is 'ensure that everyone does their duty', presumably that can be universalised. Nelson thought so. It just sounds like a hideous world of self-righteous interference.
23. Ethics / E. Utilitarianism / 1. Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism cannot make any serious sense of integrity [Williams,B]
     Full Idea: Utilitarianism cannot hope to make sense, at any serious level, of integrity.
     From: Bernard Williams (A Critique of Utilitarianism [1973], 1)
     A reaction: There will be obvious problems with this. 'My whole platoon got killed, but looking on the bright side, I preserved my integrity'. Once a theory commits entirely to one value, it then has no way to make sense of rival values.