Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Introduction to the Philosophy of History', 'Transworld Identity or worldbound Individuals?' and 'Substances without Substrata'

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


16 ideas

1. Philosophy / C. History of Philosophy / 4. Later European Philosophy / d. Nineteenth century philosophy
Hegel inserted society and history between the God-world, man-nature, man-being binary pairs [Hegel, by Safranski]
     Full Idea: Before Hegel, people thought in binary oppositions of God and the world, man and nature, man and being. After Hegel an intervening world of society and history was inserted between these pairs.
     From: report of Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840]) by Rüdiger Safranski - Nietzsche: a philosophical biography 05
     A reaction: This is what Popper later called 'World Three'. This might be seen as the start of what we islanders call 'continental' philosophy, which we have largely ignored. Analytic philosophy only discovered this through philosophy of language.
10. Modality / E. Possible worlds / 1. Possible Worlds / a. Possible worlds
Asserting a possible property is to say it would have had the property if that world had been actual [Plantinga]
     Full Idea: To say than x has a property in a possible world is simply to say that x would have had the property if that world had been actual.
     From: Alvin Plantinga (Transworld Identity or worldbound Individuals? [1973], I)
     A reaction: Plantinga tries to defuse all the problems with identity across possible worlds, by hanging on to subjunctive verbs and modal modifiers. The point, though, was to explain these, or at least to try to give their logical form.
10. Modality / E. Possible worlds / 2. Nature of Possible Worlds / a. Nature of possible worlds
A possible world is a maximal possible state of affairs [Plantinga]
     Full Idea: A possible world is just a maximal possible state of affairs.
     From: Alvin Plantinga (Transworld Identity or worldbound Individuals? [1973], I)
     A reaction: The key point here is that Plantinga includes the word 'possible' in his definition. Possibility defines the worlds, and so worlds cannot be used on their own to define possibility.
10. Modality / E. Possible worlds / 3. Transworld Objects / a. Transworld identity
If possible Socrates differs from actual Socrates, the Indiscernibility of Identicals says they are different [Plantinga]
     Full Idea: If the Socrates of the actual world has snubnosedness but Socrates-in-W does not, this is surely inconsistent with the Indiscernibility of Identicals, a principle than which none sounder can be conceived.
     From: Alvin Plantinga (Transworld Identity or worldbound Individuals? [1973], I)
     A reaction: However, we allow Socrates to differ over time while remaining the same Socrates, so some similar approach should apply here. In both cases we need some notion of what is essential to Socrates. But what unites aged 3 with aged 70?
It doesn't matter that we can't identify the possible Socrates; we can't identify adults from baby photos [Plantinga]
     Full Idea: We may say it makes no sense to say that Socrates exists at a world, if there is in principle no way of identifying him. ...But this is confused. To suppose Agnew was a precocious baby, we needn't be able to pick him from a gallery of babies.
     From: Alvin Plantinga (Transworld Identity or worldbound Individuals? [1973], I)
     A reaction: This seems a good point, and yet we have a space-time line joining adult Agnew with baby Agnew, and no such causal link is available between persons in different possible worlds. What would be the criterion in each case?
If individuals can only exist in one world, then they can never lack any of their properties [Plantinga]
     Full Idea: The Theory of Worldbound Individuals contends that no object exists in more than one possible world; this implies the outrageous view that - taking properties in the broadest sense - no object could have lacked any property that it in fact has.
     From: Alvin Plantinga (Transworld Identity or worldbound Individuals? [1973], II)
     A reaction: Leibniz is the best known exponent of this 'outrageous view', though Plantinga shows that Lewis may be seen in the same light, since only counterparts are found in possible worlds, not the real thing. The Theory does seem wrong.
10. Modality / E. Possible worlds / 3. Transworld Objects / c. Counterparts
The counterparts of Socrates have self-identity, but only the actual Socrates has identity-with-Socrates [Plantinga]
     Full Idea: While Socrates has no counterparts that lack self-identity, he does have counterparts that lack identity-with-Socrates. He alone has that - the property, that is, of being identical with the object that in fact instantiates Socrateity.
     From: Alvin Plantinga (Transworld Identity or worldbound Individuals? [1973], II)
     A reaction: I am never persuaded by arguments which rest on such dubious pseudo-properties. Whether or not a counterpart of Socrates has any sort of identity with Socrates cannot be prejudged, as it would beg the question.
Counterpart Theory absurdly says I would be someone else if things went differently [Plantinga]
     Full Idea: It makes no sense to say I could have been someone else, yet Counterpart Theory implies not merely that I could have been distinct from myself, but that I would have been distinct from myself had things gone differently in even the most miniscule detail.
     From: Alvin Plantinga (Transworld Identity or worldbound Individuals? [1973], II)
     A reaction: A counterpart doesn't appear to be 'me being distinct from myself'. We have to combine counterparts over possible worlds with perdurance over time. I am a 'worm' of time-slices. Anything not in that worm is not strictly me.
19. Language / F. Communication / 6. Interpreting Language / c. Principle of charity
We translate in a way that makes the largest possible number of statements true [Wilson,NL]
     Full Idea: We select as designatum that individual which will make the largest possible number of statements true.
     From: N.L. Wilson (Substances without Substrata [1959]), quoted by Willard Quine - Word and Object II.§13 n
     A reaction: From the Quine's reference, it sounds as if Wilson was the originator of the well-known principle of charity, later taken up by Davidson. If so, he should be famous, because it strikes me as a piece of fundamental and important wisdom.
22. Metaethics / C. The Good / 2. Happiness / a. Nature of happiness
World history has no room for happiness [Hegel]
     Full Idea: World history is not the place for happiness. Periods of happiness are empty pages in history.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: Clearly, Hegel thinks the progress of world history is much more important than happiness. This idea gives backing to those who don't care much about the casualties on either side in a major war.
24. Political Theory / A. Basis of a State / 1. A People / b. The natural life
The state of nature is one of untamed brutality [Hegel]
     Full Idea: The 'state of nature' is not an ideal condition, but a condition of injustice, of violence, of untamed natural drives, inhuman acts and emotions.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: He agrees with Hobbes, and disagrees with Rousseau. Hobbes's solution is authoritarian monarchy, but Hegel's solution is the unified and focused state, in which freedom can be realised.
24. Political Theory / A. Basis of a State / 1. A People / c. A unified people
The soul of the people is an organisation of its members which produces an essential unity [Hegel]
     Full Idea: The soul [of the people] exists only insofar as it is an organisation of its members, which - by taking itself together in its simple unity - produce the soul. Thus the people is one individuality in its essence.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: Hegel is seen (e.g. by Charles Taylor) as the ancestor of a rather attractive communitarianism, but I think Popper is more accurate in seeing him as the first stage of modern totalitarianism. The people seen as one individual terrifies me.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 6. Liberalism / g. Liberalism critique
The human race matters, and individuals have little importance [Hegel]
     Full Idea: Individuals are of slight importance compared to the mass of the human race.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: A perfect statement of the anti-liberal viewpoint. Hegel is complex, but this is the strand that leads to ridiculous totalitarianism, where the highest ideal is to die for the glory of your nation. Importance can only start from individuals.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 14. Nationalism
In a good state the goal of the citizens and of the whole state are united [Hegel]
     Full Idea: A state is well constituted and internally strong if the private interest of the citizens is united in the universal goal of the state.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: The obvious question is who decides on the goals, and what to do with the citizens who don't accept them.
25. Social Practice / A. Freedoms / 5. Freedom of lifestyle
The goal of the world is Spirit's consciousness and enactment of freedom [Hegel]
     Full Idea: The final goal of the world is Spirit's consciousness of its freedom, and hence also the actualisation of that very freedom.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: I have the impression that this ridiculous idea has been very influential in modern French philosophy, since they all seem to be dreaming of some perfect freedom at the end of the rainbow. Freedom is good, but this gives it a bad name.
25. Social Practice / E. Policies / 5. Education / d. Study of history
We should all agree that there is reason in history [Hegel]
     Full Idea: We ought to have the firm and unconquerable belief that there is reason in history.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 2)
     A reaction: This is a ridiculous but hugely influential idea, and I have no idea what makes Hegel believe it. It is the Stoic idea that nature is intrinsically rational, but extending it to human history is absurd. Human exceptionalism. Needs a dose of Darwin.