37 ideas
21757 | Philosophy is the conceptual essence of the shape of history [Hegel] |
Full Idea: Philosophy is the supreme blossom - the concept - of the entire shape of history, the consciousness and the spiritual essence of the whole situation, the spirit of the age as the spirit present and aware of itself in thought. | |
From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Lectures on the History of Philosophy [1830], p.25), quoted by Stephen Houlgate - An Introduction to Hegel 01 | |
A reaction: This sees philosophy as intrinsically historical, which is a founding idea for 'continental' philosophy. Analysis is tied to science, in which the history of the subject is seen as irrelevant to its truth. Does this mean we can't go back to Aristotle? |
18450 | Philosophy has its own mode of death, by separating soul from body [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: There is a double death. One, known by all men, consists in the separation of the body with the soul; the other, characteristic of philosophers, results in the separation of the soul from the body. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 1Enn9 3) |
9821 | A definition need not capture the sense of an expression - just get the reference right [Frege, by Dummett] |
Full Idea: Frege expressly denies that a correct definition need capture the sense of the expression it defines: it need only get the reference right. | |
From: report of Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894]) by Michael Dummett - Frege philosophy of mathematics Ch.3 | |
A reaction: This might hit up against the renate/cordate problem, of two co-extensive concepts, where the definition gets the extension right, but the intension wrong. |
9585 | Since every definition is an equation, one cannot define equality itself [Frege] |
Full Idea: Since every definition is an equation, one cannot define equality itself. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.327) | |
A reaction: This seems a particularly nice instance of the general rule that 'you have to start somewhere'. It is a nice test case for the nature of meaning to ask 'what do you understand when you understand equality?', given that you can't define it. |
17446 | Counting rests on one-one correspondence, of numerals to objects [Frege] |
Full Idea: Counting rests itself on a one-one correlation, namely of numerals 1 to n and the objects. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894]), quoted by Richard G. Heck - Cardinality, Counting and Equinumerosity 3 | |
A reaction: Parsons observes that counting will establish a one-one correspondence, but that doesn't make it the aim of counting, and so Frege hasn't answered Husserl properly. Which of the two is conceptually prior? How do you decide. |
9582 | Husserl rests sameness of number on one-one correlation, forgetting the correlation with numbers themselves [Frege] |
Full Idea: When Husserl says that sameness of number can be shown by one-one correlation, he forgets that this counting itself rests on a univocal one-one correlation, namely that between the numerals 1 to n and the objects of the set. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.326) | |
A reaction: This is the platonist talking. Neo-logicism is attempting to build numbers just from the one-one correlation of objects. |
9586 | In a number-statement, something is predicated of a concept [Frege] |
Full Idea: In a number-statement, something is predicated of a concept. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.328) | |
A reaction: A succinct statement of Frege's theory of numbers. By my lights that would make numbers at least second-order abstractions. |
9580 | Our concepts recognise existing relations, they don't change them [Frege] |
Full Idea: The bringing of an object under a concept is merely the recognition of a relation which previously already obtained, [but in the abstractionist view] objects are essentially changed by the process, so that objects brought under a concept become similar. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.324) | |
A reaction: Frege's view would have to account for occasional misapplications of concepts, like taking a dolphin to be a fish, or falsely thinking there is someone in the cellar. |
9589 | Numbers are not real like the sea, but (crucially) they are still objective [Frege] |
Full Idea: The sea is something real and a number is not; but this does not prevent it from being something objective; and that is the important thing. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.337) | |
A reaction: This seems a qualification of Frege's platonism. It is why people start talking about abstract items which 'subsist', instead of 'exist'. It shows Frege's motivation in all this, which is to secure logic and maths from the vagaries of psychology. |
9577 | The naïve view of number is that it is like a heap of things, or maybe a property of a heap [Frege] |
Full Idea: The most naïve opinion of number is that it is something like a heap in which things are contained. The next most naïve view is the conception of number as the property of a heap, cleansing the objects of their particulars. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.323) | |
A reaction: A hundred toothbrushes and a hundred sponges can be seen to contain the same number (by one-to-one mapping), without actually knowing what that number is. There is something numerical in the heap, even if the number is absent. |
9578 | If objects are just presentation, we get increasing abstraction by ignoring their properties [Frege] |
Full Idea: If an object is just presentation, we can pay less attention to a property and it disappears. By letting one characteristic after another disappear, we obtain concepts that are increasingly more abstract. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.324) | |
A reaction: Frege despises this view. Note there is scope in the despised view for degrees or levels of abstraction, defined in terms of number of properties ignored. Part of Frege's criticism is realist. He retains the object, while Husserl imagines it different. |
18451 | The presence of the incorporeal is only known by certain kinds of disposition [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: Being everywhere and nowhere, the incorporeal, wherever it happens to be, betrays its presence only by a certain kind of disposition. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 4Enn3 21(20)) | |
A reaction: There is a mystical or dualist view of fundamental powers, as the spiritual engine which drives passive physical nature. It's rubbish of course, but if powers are primitive in a naturalistic theory, it is not a view which can be refuted. |
18459 | Diversity arises from the power of unity [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: Diversity is born of the development of the power of unity. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 6Enn5 42) | |
A reaction: I doubt whether even Porphyry understood this, but we might say that once the principle of unification enters into nature, it will inevitably result in diversity. One all-embracing unity would be indiscernible. |
18452 | Memory is not conserved images, but reproduction of previous thought [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: Memory does not consist in preserving images. It is a faculty of reproducing the conceptions with which our soul has been occupied. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 5Enn6 25(2)) |
18453 | Intelligence is aware of itself, so the intelligence is both the thinker and the thought [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: Since intelligence is intelligible for intelligence, intelligence is its own object. ...Intelligence, therefore, is simultaneously thinker and thought, all that thinks and all that is thought. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 5Enn3 32(5-7)) | |
A reaction: This is a bit of a problem for Descartes, if the Cogito is taken as offering evidence (thought) for the existence of a thinker ('I'). Porphyry implies that the separation Descartes requires is impossible. |
18462 | The soul is everywhere and nowhere in the body, and must be its cause [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: The soul is neither a body, nor in the body, but is only the cause of the body, because she is simultaneously everywhere and nowhere in the body. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 6Enn5 43) | |
A reaction: This is the rather bewildering phenomenology of consciousness which persuaded Descartes of dualism. |
18463 | Successful introspection reveals the substrate along with the object of thought [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: He who by thought can penetrate within his own substance, and can thus acquire knowledge of it, finds himself in this actualisation of knowledge and consciousness, where the substrate that knows is identical with the object that is known. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 6Enn5 44) | |
A reaction: It seems remarkably that this ability is confidently asserted by Porphyry, and flatly denied by Hume. Were they just different people, or were they looking for different things, or was one of them deluded? |
18458 | The soul is bound to matter by the force of its own disposition [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: The individual soul, which declines towards matter, is bound to the matter by the form which her disposition has made her choose. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 6Enn4 39) | |
A reaction: This sounds like the soul is boss over the matter, and yet the soul is 'made' to choose union with matter. The Universal Soul is seen by Porphyr as the controller of the situation. |
9581 | Many people have the same thought, which is the component, not the private presentation [Frege] |
Full Idea: The same thought can be grasped by many people. The components of a thought, and even more so the things themselves, must be distinguished from the presentations which in the soul accompany the grasping of a thought. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.325) | |
A reaction: This is the basic realisation, also found in Russell, of how so much confusion has crept into philosophy, in Berkeley, for example. Frege starts down the road which leads to the externalist view of content. |
9579 | Disregarding properties of two cats still leaves different objects, but what is now the difference? [Frege] |
Full Idea: If from a black cat and a white cat we disregard colour, then posture, then location, ..we finally derive something which is completely without restrictions on content; but what is derived from the objects does differ, although it is not easy to say how. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.324) | |
A reaction: This is a key objection to abstractionism for Frege - we are counting two cats, not two substrata of essential catness, or whatever. But what makes a cat countable? (Key question!) It isn't its colour, or posture or location. |
9587 | How do you find the right level of inattention; you eliminate too many or too few characteristics [Frege] |
Full Idea: Inattention is a very strong lye which must not be too concentrated, or it dissolves everything (such as the connection between the objects), but must not be too weak, to produce sufficient change. Personally I cannot find the proper dilution. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.330) | |
A reaction: We may sympathise with the lack of precision here (frustrating for a logician), but it is not difficult to say of a baseball defence 'just concentrate on the relations, and ignore the individuals who implement it'. You retain basic baseball skills. |
9588 | Number-abstraction somehow makes things identical without changing them! [Frege] |
Full Idea: Number-abstraction simply has the wonderful and very fruitful property of making things absolutely the same as one another without altering them. Something like this is possible only in the psychological wash-tub. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.332) | |
A reaction: Frege can be awfully sarcastic. I don't really see his difficulty. For mathematics we only need to know what is countable about an object - we don't need to know how many hairs there are on the cat, only that it has identity. |
9583 | Psychological logicians are concerned with sense of words, but mathematicians study the reference [Frege] |
Full Idea: The psychological logicians are concerned with the sense of the words and with the presentations, which they do not distinguish from the sense; but the mathematicians are concerned with the matter itself, with the reference of the words. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.326) | |
A reaction: This is helpful for showing the point of his sense/reference distinction; it is part of his campaign against psychologism, by showing that there is a non-psychological component to language - the reference, where it meets the public world. |
9584 | Identity baffles psychologists, since A and B must be presented differently to identify them [Frege] |
Full Idea: The relation of sameness remains puzzling to a psychological logician. They cannot say 'A is the same as B', because that requires distinguishing A from B, so that these would have to be different presentations. | |
From: Gottlob Frege (Review of Husserl's 'Phil of Arithmetic' [1894], p.327) | |
A reaction: This is why Frege needed the concept of reference, so that identity could be outside the mind (as in Hesperus = Phosophorus). Think about an electron; now think about a different electron. |
18464 | Justice is each person fulfilling his function [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: Justice, as has been rightly said, consists in each one fulfilling his [authentic and proper] function. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 6Enn5 44) | |
A reaction: This is presumably a direct reference to the theory in Plato's 'Republic'. It makes the connection between virtue and function which I take to be basic to virtue theory, giving it a naturalistic advantaged over other theories. |
18448 | We should avoid the pleasures of love, or at least, should not enact our dreams [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: The pleasures of love will not even involuntarily be tasted, at least, she will not allow herself to be drawn beyond the lights of fancy that occur in dreams. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 1Enn2 I.4) | |
A reaction: Presumably erotic dreams are only tolerated because not much can be done about them. This brings out the puritanism of neo-platonism. |
18444 | Civil virtues make us behave benevolently, and thereby unite citizens [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: The object of the civil virtues is to make us benevolent in our dealings with our fellow-human beings, and are so-called because they unite citizens. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 1Enn2 I.1) | |
A reaction: Modern commentators underestimate the close link between ancient virtue and citizenship. It is hard for one person to have much of a notion of virtue if they live on a desert island, beyond caring for personal health. |
18445 | Civil virtues control the passions, and make us conform to our nature [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: The civil virtues moderate the passions; their object is to teach us to live in conformity with the laws of human nature. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 1Enn2 I.2) | |
A reaction: The link with human nature is basic to virtue theory, but this proposal is rather too vague. Are passions not part of the laws of human nature? |
18446 | Purificatory virtues detach the soul completely from the passions [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: The object of the 'purificatory' virtues is to detach the soul completely from the passions. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 1Enn2 I.4) | |
A reaction: This is an aspect of virtue theory which doesn't appear in Aristotle. He is in favour of rational control of the passions, but not of totally abandoning them. The neo-platonists are much more puritanical. They seem to go against human nature. |
18447 | There are practical, purificatory, contemplative, and exemplary virtues [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: The practical virtues make man virtuous; the purificatory virtues make man divine....; the contemplative virtues defiy; while the exemplary virtues make a man the parent of divinities. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 1Enn2 I.4) | |
A reaction: I like the idea of the 'exemplary' virtues. I think an entire theory of morality could be built on the notion that we are all role-models for one another. |
18456 | Unified real existence is neither great nor small, though greatness and smallness participate in it [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: By its identity and numerical unity, real existence is neither great nor small, neither very large nor very small, though it causes even greatest and smallest to participate in its nature. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 6Enn4 37(5)) | |
A reaction: Note the platonic word 'participate' [metechein], suggesting that he is talking about the Form of Existence here. Note also that we have 'real' existence here, implying a lesser type of existence that participates in it. |
18454 | Time is the circular movement of the soul [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: It is the circular movement of the soul that constitutes time, just as the permanence of intelligence in itself constitutes eternity. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 5Enn3 32(5-7)) | |
A reaction: Plato loved circles. If you think time is subjective, this is trying to express your intuition. Personally I think it is nonsense |
18455 | Some think time is seen at rest, as well as in movement [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: Some have believed that time manifested in rest as well as in movement. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 5Enn3 32(5-7)) | |
A reaction: If you like this idea, you should see Shoemaker's lovely three-worlds thought experiment. |
18460 | God is nowhere, and hence everywhere [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: The divinity is everywhere because it is nowhere. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 6Enn5 43) |
18461 | Everything existing proceeds from divinity, and is within divinity [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: All things that possess or do not possess existence proceed from divinity, and are within divinity. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 6Enn5 43) | |
A reaction: Nice to see Porphyry endorsing Meinongian objects. I doubt whether he counts as a pantheist, but this is a very pantheistic remark. |
18449 | Nature binds or detaches body to soul, but soul itself joins and detaches soul from body [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: Nature binds the body to the soul, but it is the soul herself that has bound herself to the body. It, therefore, belongs to nature to detach the body from the soul, while it is the soul herself that detaches herself from the body. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 1Enn9 2) | |
A reaction: Baffling. What happens if there is a conflict? I suppose either party can cancel the bargain, but who wins when they disagree? |
18457 | Individual souls are all connected, though distinct, and without dividing universal Soul [Porphyry] |
Full Idea: Individual souls are distinct without being separated from each other, and without dividing the universal Soul into a number of parts; they are united to each other without becoming confused. | |
From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 6Enn4 39) | |
A reaction: This sounds like Jung's theory that there is a universal subconscious which links us all together. Taken literally, I assume it is nonsense. As an invitation to acknowledge how much we all have in common, it is a nice corrective to liberal individualism. |