Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Mahaprajnaparamitashastra', 'Letters to Paul Pellison-Fontinier' and 'Equality'

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


11 ideas

23. Ethics / C. Virtue Theory / 3. Virtues / a. Virtues
The six perfections are giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, and wisdom [Nagarjuna]
     Full Idea: The six perfections are of giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, and wisdom.
     From: Nagarjuna (Mahaprajnaparamitashastra [c.120], 88)
     A reaction: What is 'morality', if giving is not part of it? I like patience and vigour being two of the virtues, which immediately implies an Aristotelian mean (which is always what is 'appropriate').
23. Ethics / D. Deontological Ethics / 3. Universalisability
The general form of moral reasoning is putting yourself in other people's shoes [Nagel]
     Full Idea: I believe the general form of moral reasoning is to put yourself in other people's shoes.
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality [1977], §9)
24. Political Theory / A. Basis of a State / 4. Original Position / c. Difference principle
An egalitarian system must give priority to those with the worst prospects in life [Nagel]
     Full Idea: What makes a system egalitarian is the priority it gives to the claims of those whose overall life prospects put them at the bottom.
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality [1977], §6)
25. Social Practice / B. Equalities / 1. Grounds of equality
Equality was once opposed to aristocracy, but now it opposes public utility and individual rights [Nagel]
     Full Idea: Egalitarianism was once opposed to aristocratic values, but now it is opposed by adherents of two non-aristocratic values: utility (increase benefit, even if unequally) and individual rights (which redistribution violates).
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality [1977], §2)
The ideal of acceptability to each individual underlies the appeal to equality [Nagel]
     Full Idea: The ideal of acceptability to each individual underlies the appeal to equality.
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality [1977], §8)
In judging disputes, should we use one standard, or those of each individual? [Nagel]
     Full Idea: In assessing equality of claims, it must be decided whether to use a single, objective standard, or whether interests should be ranked by the person's own estimation. Also should they balance momentary or long-term needs?
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality [1977], §6)
25. Social Practice / B. Equalities / 2. Political equality
Equality can either be defended as good for society, or as good for individual rights [Nagel]
     Full Idea: The communitarian defence of equality says it is good for society as a whole, whereas the individualistic defence defends equality as a correct distributive principle.
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality [1977], §2)
Equality nowadays is seen as political, social, legal and economic [Nagel]
     Full Idea: Contemporary political debate recognises four types of equality: political, social, legal and economic.
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality [1977], §1)
     A reaction: Meaning equality of 1) power and influence, 2) status and respect, 3) rights and justice, 4) wealth.
25. Social Practice / C. Rights / 1. Basis of Rights
A morality of rights is very minimal, leaving a lot of human life without restrictions or duties [Nagel]
     Full Idea: The morality of rights tends to be a limited, even minimal, morality. It leaves a great deal of human life ungoverned by moral restrictions or requirements.
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality [1977], §5)
27. Natural Reality / A. Classical Physics / 1. Mechanics / c. Forces
Clearly, force is that from which action follows, when unimpeded [Leibniz]
     Full Idea: The notion of force is as clear as that of action and passion, because it is that from which action follows when nothing prevents it.
     From: Gottfried Leibniz (Letters to Paul Pellison-Fontinier [1691], A1.6.226), quoted by Daniel Garber - Leibniz:Body,Substance,Monad 4
     A reaction: For Leibniz, force seems to be a metaphysical notion, rather than a feature of the physical world. I take it to be the bottom level of explanation, and it equates with Aristotelian form and essence.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / i. Denying time
Time doesn't exist, since its parts don't coexist [Leibniz]
     Full Idea: Time never exists, since all of its parts never exist together.
     From: Gottfried Leibniz (Letters to Paul Pellison-Fontinier [1691], A1.6.226), quoted by Daniel Garber - Leibniz:Body,Substance,Monad 4
     A reaction: The problem here is that he seems to be admitting that time has 'parts'. Can something have parts and not exist? Events will also fail to exist by this criterion, though we could hardly deny that events (or some such) 'happen'.