34 ideas
| 14179 | The finest branch of wisdom is justice and moderation in ordering states and families [Plato] |
| Full Idea: By far the greatest and fairest branch of wisdom is that which is concerned with the due ordering of states and families, whose name is moderation and justice. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 209a) | |
| A reaction: ['Justice' is probably 'dikaiosune'] It is hard to disagree with this, and it relegates ivory tower philosophical contemplation to second place, unlike the late books of Aristotle's Ethics. |
| 11115 | 'All horses' either picks out the horses, or the things which are horses [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: Two ways to see 'all horses are animals' are as picking out all the horses (so that it is a 'horse-quantifier'), ..or as ranging over lots of things in addition to horses, with 'horses' then restricting the things to those that satisfy 'is a horse'. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 2) | |
| A reaction: Jubien says this gives you two different metaphysical views, of a world of horses etc., or a world of things which 'are horses'. I vote for the first one, as the second seems to invoke an implausible categorical property ('being a horse'). Cf Idea 11116. |
| 1607 | Diotima said the Forms are the objects of desire in philosophical discourse [Plato, by Roochnik] |
| Full Idea: According to Diotima, the Forms are the objects of desire operative in philosophical discourse. | |
| From: report of Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 210a4-) by David Roochnik - The Tragedy of Reason p.199 |
| 11116 | Being a physical object is our most fundamental category [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: Being a physical object (as opposed to being a horse or a statue) really is our most fundamental category for dealing with the external world. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 2) | |
| A reaction: This raises the interesting question of why any categories should be considered to be more 'fundamental' than others. I can only think that we perceive something to be an object fractionally before we (usually) manage to identify it. |
| 18948 | There is an object for every set of properties (some of which exist, and others don't) [Parsons,T, by Sawyer] |
| Full Idea: According to Terence Parsons, there is an object corresponding to every set of properties. To some of those sets of properties there corresponds an object that exists, and to others there corresponds an object that does not exist (a nonexistent object). | |
| From: report of Terence Parsons (Nonexistent Objects [1980]) by Sarah Sawyer - Empty Names 5 | |
| A reaction: This I take to be the main source of the modern revival of Meinong's notorious view of objects (attacked by Russell). I always find the thought 'a round square is square' to be true, and in need of a truthmaker. But must a round square be non-triangular? |
| 11117 | Haecceities implausibly have no qualities [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: Properties of 'being such and such specific entity' are often called 'haecceities', but this term carries the connotation of non-qualitativeness which I don't favour. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 2) | |
| A reaction: The way he defines it makes it sound as if it was a category, but I take it to be more like a bare individual essence. If it has not qualities then it has no causal powers, so there could be no evidence for its existence. |
| 11119 | De re necessity is just de dicto necessity about object-essences [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: I suggest that the de re is to be analyzed in terms of the de dicto. ...We have a case of modality de re when (and only when) the appropriate property in the de dicto formulation is an object-essence. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 5) |
| 11118 | Modal propositions transcend the concrete, but not the actual [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: Where modal propositions may once have seemed to transcend the actual, they now seem only to transcend the concrete. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 4) | |
| A reaction: This is because Jubien has defended a form of platonism. Personally I take modal propositions to be perceptible in the concrete world, by recognising the processes involved, not the mere static stuff. |
| 11108 | Your properties, not some other world, decide your possibilities [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: The possibility of your having been a playwright has nothing to do with how people are on other planets, whether in our own or in some other realm. It is only to do with you and the relevant property. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 1) | |
| A reaction: I'm inclined to think that this simple point is conclusive disproof of possible worlds as an explanation of modality (apart from Jubien's other nice points). What we need to understand are modal properties, not other worlds. |
| 11111 | Modal truths are facts about parts of this world, not about remote maximal entities [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: Typical modal truths are just facts about our world, and generally facts about very small parts of it, not facts about some infinitude of complex, maximal entities. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 1) | |
| A reaction: I think we should embrace this simple fact immediately, and drop all this nonsense about possible worlds, even if they are useful for the semantics of modal logic. |
| 11105 | We have no idea how many 'possible worlds' there might be [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: As soon as we start talking about 'possible world', we beg the question of their relevance to our prior notion of possibility. For all we know, there are just two such realms, or twenty-seven, or uncountably many, or even set-many. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 1) |
| 11107 | If there are no other possible worlds, do we then exist necessarily? [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: Suppose there happen to be no other concrete realms. Would we happily accept the consequence that we exist necessarily? | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 1) |
| 11106 | If all possible worlds just happened to include stars, their existence would be necessary [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: If all of the possible worlds happened to include stars, how plausible is it to think that if this is how things really are, then we've just been wrong to regard the existence of stars as contingent? | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 1) |
| 11112 | Possible worlds just give parallel contingencies, with no explanation at all of necessity [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: In the world theory, what passes for 'necessity' is just a bunch of parallel 'contingencies'. The theory provides no basis for understanding why these contingencies repeat unremittingly across the board (while others do not). | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 1) |
| 11109 | If other worlds exist, then they are scattered parts of the actual world [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: Any other realms that happened to exist would just be scattered parts of the actual world, not entire worlds at all. It would just happen that physical reality was fragmented in this remarkable but modally inconsequential way. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 1) | |
| A reaction: This is aimed explicitly at Lewis's modal realism, and strikes me as correct. Jubien's key point here is that they are irrelevant to modality, just as foreign countries are irrelevant to the modality of this one. |
| 11113 | Worlds don't explain necessity; we use necessity to decide on possible worlds [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: The suspicion is that the necessity doesn't arise from how worlds are, but rather that the worlds are taken to be as they are in order to capture the intuitive necessity. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 1) | |
| A reaction: It has always seemed to me rather glaring that you need a prior notion of 'possible' before you can start to talk about 'possible worlds', but I have always been too timid to disagree with the combination of Saul Kripke and David Lewis. Thank you, Jubien! |
| 11110 | We mustn't confuse a similar person with the same person [Jubien] |
| Full Idea: If someone similar to Humphrey won the election, that nicely establishes the possibility of someone's winning who is similar to Humphrey. But we mustn't confuse this possibility with the intuitively different possibility of Humphrey himself winning. | |
| From: Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 1) |
| 174 | True opinion without reason is midway between wisdom and ignorance [Plato] |
| Full Idea: There is a state of mind half-way between wisdom and ignorance - having true opinions without being able to give reasons for them. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 202a) | |
| A reaction: Compare Idea 2140, where Plato scorns this state of mind. What he describes could be split into two - purely lucky true beliefs, and 'externalist knowledge', with non-conscious justification. |
| 181 | Only the gods stay unchanged; we replace our losses with similar acquisitions [Plato] |
| Full Idea: We retain identity not by staying the same (the preserve of gods) but by replacing losses with new similar acquisitions. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 208b) | |
| A reaction: Any modern student of personal identity should be intrigued by this remark! It appears to take a rather physical view of the matter, and to be aware of human biology as a process. Are my continuing desires token-identical, or just 'similar'? |
| 180 | We call a person the same throughout life, but all their attributes change [Plato] |
| Full Idea: During the period from boyhood to old age, man does not retain the same attributes, though he is called the same person. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 207d) | |
| A reaction: This precisely identifies the basic problem of personal identity over time. If this is the problem, DNA looks more and more significant for the answer, though it would be an awful mistake to think a pattern of DNA was a person. |
| 4026 | Beauty is harmony with what is divine, and ugliness is lack of such harmony [Plato] |
| Full Idea: Ugliness is out of harmony with everything that is godly; beauty, however, is in harmony with the divine. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 206d) | |
| A reaction: This remark shows how the concept of 'harmony' is at the centre of Greek thought (and is a potential bridge of the is/ought gap). |
| 172 | Love of ugliness is impossible [Plato] |
| Full Idea: There cannot be such a thing as love of ugliness. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 201a) |
| 173 | Beauty and goodness are the same [Plato] |
| Full Idea: What is good is the same as what is beautiful. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 201c) |
| 183 | Stage two is the realisation that beauty of soul is of more value than beauty of body [Plato] |
| Full Idea: The second stage of progress is to realise that beauty of soul is more valuable than beauty of body. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 210b) |
| 184 | Progress goes from physical beauty, to moral beauty, to the beauty of knowledge, and reaches absolute beauty [Plato] |
| Full Idea: One should step up from physical beauty, to moral beauty, to the beauty of knowledge, until at last one knows what absolute beauty is. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 211c) | |
| A reaction: Presumably this is why Socrates refused sexual favours to Alcibiades. The idea is inspiring, and yet it is a rejection of humanity. |
| 171 | Music is a knowledge of love in the realm of harmony and rhythm [Plato] |
| Full Idea: Music may be called a knowledge of the principles of love in the realm of harmony and rhythm. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 187c) |
| 176 | Love follows beauty, wisdom is exceptionally beautiful, so love follows wisdom [Plato] |
| Full Idea: Wisdom is one of the most beautiful of things, and Love is love of beauty, so it follows that Love must be a love of wisdom. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 204b) | |
| A reaction: Good, but wisdom isn't the only exceptionally beautiful thing. Music is beautiful partly because it is devoid of ideas. |
| 14177 | Love assists men in achieving merit and happiness [Plato] |
| Full Idea: Phaedrus: Love is not only the oldest and most honourable of the gods, but also the most powerful to assist men in the acquisition of merit and happiness, both here and hereafter. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 180b) | |
| A reaction: Maybe we should talk less of love as a feeling, and more as a motivation, not just in human relationships, but in activities like gardening and database compilation. |
| 179 | Love is desire for perpetual possession of the good [Plato] |
| Full Idea: Love is desire for perpetual possession of the good. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 206a) | |
| A reaction: Even the worst human beings often have lovers. 'Perpetual' is a nice observation. |
| 177 | If a person is good they will automatically become happy [Plato] |
| Full Idea: 'What will be gained by a man who is good?' 'That is easy - he will be happy'. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 205a) | |
| A reaction: Suppose you tried to assassinate Hitler in 1944 (a good deed), but failed. Happiness presumably results from success, rather than mere good intentions. |
| 14178 | Happiness is secure enjoyment of what is good and beautiful [Plato] |
| Full Idea: By happy you mean in secure enjoyment of what is good and beautiful? - Certainly. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 202c) | |
| A reaction: We seem to have lost track of the idea that beauty might be an essential ingredient of happiness. |
| 170 | The only slavery which is not dishonourable is slavery to excellence [Plato] |
| Full Idea: The only form of servitude which has no dishonour has for its object the acquisition of excellence. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 184c) |
| 182 | The first step on the right path is the contemplation of physical beauty when young [Plato] |
| Full Idea: The man who would pursue the right way to his goal must begin, when he is young, by contemplating physical beauty. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 210a) |
| 175 | Gods are not lovers of wisdom, because they are already wise [Plato] |
| Full Idea: No god is a lover of wisdom or desires to be wise, for he is wise already. | |
| From: Plato (The Symposium [c.384 BCE], 204a) |