19554
|
Denying closure is denying we know P when we know P and Q, which is absurd in simple cases [Hawthorne]
|
|
Full Idea:
How could we know that P and Q but not be in a position to know that P (as deniers of closure must say)? If my glass is full of wine, we know 'g is full of wine, and not full of non-wine'. How can we deny that we know it is not full of non-wine?
|
|
From:
John Hawthorne (The Case for Closure [2005], 2)
|
|
A reaction:
Hawthorne merely raises this doubt. Dretske is concerned with heavyweight implications, but how do you accept lightweight implications like this one, and then suddenly reject them when they become too heavy? [see p.49]
|
20130
|
It is absurd to think you can change your own essence, like a garment [Nietzsche]
|
|
Full Idea:
Man is necessity down to his last fibre, and totally 'unfree', that is if one means by freedom the foolish demand to be able to change one's 'essentia' arbitrarily, like a garment.
|
|
From:
Friedrich Nietzsche (Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks [1873], p.7), quoted by Brian Leiter - Nietzsche On Morality 2 'Realism'
|
|
A reaction:
This is the big difference between the existentialism of Nietzsche and the more famous Sartrean approach, where the idea of being able to remake your essence is the most exciting and glamorous proposal. I'm with Nietzsche.
|
7399
|
Even without religion, there are many guides to morality [Bacon]
|
|
Full Idea:
Atheism leaves a man to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to laws, to reputation; all which may be guides to an outward moral virtue, though religion were not.
|
|
From:
Francis Bacon (17: Of Superstition [1625], p.52)
|
|
A reaction:
One might add to Bacon's list 'contracts', or 'rational consistency', or 'self-evident human excellence', or 'natural sympathy'. This is a striking idea, which clearly made churchmen uneasy when atheism began to spread.
|