59 ideas
16440 | I don't think Lewis's cost-benefit reflective equilibrium approach offers enough guidance [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: Lewis articulated and made fashionable the cost-benefit reflective equilibrium methodology, but I have my reservations as it does not offer much guidance. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 1.1) | |
A reaction: Stalnaker suggests that this approach has 'run amok' in Lewis's case, giving reality to possible worlds. He spends much effort on showing the 'benefits' of a profoundly implausible view. The same can be said of 4D Perdurantism. |
23183 | Different abilities are needed for living in an incomplete and undogmatic system [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: There is an entirely different strength and mobility to maintaining oneself in an incomplete system, with free, open vistas, than in a dogmatic world. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[025]) | |
A reaction: This is like Keats's 'negative capability' - the ability to live in a state of uncertainty. I'm a fan of attempts to create a philosophical system, but dogmatism would seem to be the death of such a project. How would you live with your system? Nice. |
23188 | Bad writers use shapeless floating splotches of concepts [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: Bad writers have only shapeless floating splotches of concepts in their heads. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[083]) | |
A reaction: Under 'conceptual analyis' not because he analyses concepts, but because he recognises their foundation importance in philosophy. I get more irritated by unchallenged concepts than by drifting concepts. Writer must know and challenge their key concepts. |
23212 | A text has many interpretations, but no 'correct' one [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: The same text allows innumerable interpretations: there is no 'correct' interpretation. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 1[120]) | |
A reaction: It is hard to defend a 'correct' interpretation, but I think it is obvious to students of literature that some interpretations are very silly, such as reading things allegorically when there was no such intention. |
23199 | What is the search for truth if it isn't moral? [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: What is searching for truth, truthfulness, honesty if not something moral? | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 35[05]) | |
A reaction: Feels right to me. It might be an effect of the virtue of respect. If you respect a person you tell them the truth (assuming they want the truth). Lying to someone is a sort of contempt. |
23202 | Like all philosophers, I love truth [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: I, too, love truth, like all philosophers. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 37[02]) | |
A reaction: Please pay attention to this remark! His perspectivalism is not a denial of truth. It is an epistemological phenomenon, not a metaphysical one. The perspectives are the nearest we can get to truth. Humanity therefore needs teamwork. |
16468 | Non-S5 can talk of contingent or necessary necessities [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: One can make sense of necessary versus contingent necessities in a non-S5 modal semantics. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 4.3 n17) | |
A reaction: In S5 □φ → □□φ, so all necessities are necessary. Does it make any sense to say 'I suppose this might have been necessarily true'? |
16449 | In modal set theory, sets only exist in a possible world if that world contains all of its members [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: One principle of modal set theory should be uncontroversial: a set exists in a given possible world if and only if all of its members exist at that world. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 2.4) | |
A reaction: Does this mean there can be no set containing all of my ancestors and future descendants? In no world can we coexist. |
23196 | Logic is a fiction, which invents the view that one thought causes another [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: The model of a complete fiction is logic. Here a thinking is made up where a thought is posited as the cause of another thought. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[249]) | |
A reaction: He could almost be referring to Frege's Third Realm. Most hard core analytic philosophers seem to think that propositions have tight logical relationships which are nothing to do with the people who think them. |
16464 | We regiment to get semantic structure, for evaluating arguments, and understanding complexities [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: The point of regimentation is to give a perspicuous representation of the semantic structure of an expression, making it easier to evaluate the validity of arguments and to interpret complex statements. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 4.2) | |
A reaction: This is an authoritative summary from an expert of why all philosophers must take an interest in logical form. |
16465 | In 'S was F or some other than S was F', the disjuncts need S, but the whole disjunction doesn't [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: In 'either Socrates was a philosopher or someone other than Socrates was a philosopher', both propositions expressed by the disjuncts depend for their existence on the existence of Socrates, but the whole disjunction does not. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 4.2) | |
A reaction: Nice example, just the sort of thing we pay philosophers to come up with. He is claiming that propositions can exist in possible worlds in which the individuals mentioned do not exist. |
23186 | Numbers enable us to manage the world - to the limits of counting [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: Numbers are our major means of making the world manageable. We comprehend as far as we can count, i.e. as far as a constancy can be perceived. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[058]) | |
A reaction: I don't agree with 'major', but it is a nice thought. The intermediate concept is a 'unit', which means identifying something as a 'thing', which is how we seem to grasp the world. So to what extent do we comprehend the infinite. Enter Cantor… |
16434 | Some say what exists must do so, and nothing else could possible exist [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: Some philosophers deny there could have been anything other than what in fact exists, or that anything that exists could have failed to exist. This is developed in very different ways by Wittgenstein (in 'Tractatus'), Lewis and Williamson. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 1) | |
A reaction: This could come in various strengths. A weak version would say that, empirically, that all talk of what doesn't exist is vacuous. A strong necessity (Williamson?) that totally rules out other possible existence is a very odd view. |
16439 | A nominalist view says existence is having spatio-temporal location [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: A nominalist definition of existence is 'having spatio-temporal location'. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 1.1) | |
A reaction: This would evidently be physicalist as well as nominalist. Presumably it fits the 'mosaic' of reality Lewis refers to. I find this view sympathetic. A process of abstraction is required to get the rest of the stuff we talk about. |
23211 | Events are just interpretations of groups of appearances [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: There is no event in itself. What happens is a group of appearances selected and summarised by an interpreting being. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 1[115]) | |
A reaction: Since innumerable events are nested within one another, such as the events at a carnival, this is obviously true. A primitive 'Kim event' (an object changes a property) might have objective existence. Carnivals happen, though. |
16443 | Properties are modal, involving possible situations where they are exemplified [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: I take properties and relations to be modal notions. Properties are to be understood in terms of what it would be for them to be exemplified, which means understanding them in terms of a range of possible situations. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 1.2) | |
A reaction: I can't make head or tail of a property as anything other than a feature of some entity. Treating properties as a 'range of situations' is just as baffling to me as treating them as sets of objects. |
16471 | I accept a hierarchy of properties of properties of properties [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: I myself am prepared to accept higher-order properties and relations. There is the property of being Socrates, …and the property of being the property of being Socrates, ..and so on. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 4.4) | |
A reaction: Elsewhere I have quoted such a hierarchy of vacuous properties as an absurdity that arises if all predicates are treated as properties. Logicians can live with such stuff, given their set hierarchy and so on, but in science and life this is a nonsense. |
16452 | Dispositions have modal properties, of which properties things would have counterfactually [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: Dispositional properties deserve special mention since they seem to be properties that have modal consequences - consequences for what properties the individuals that instantiate them would have in counterfactual circumstances. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 3.4) | |
A reaction: I take this to be the key idea in trying to understand modality, but Stalnaker makes this point and then moves swiftly on, because it is so far away from his possible worlds models, in which he has invested a lifetime. |
16467 | 'Socrates is essentially human' seems to say nothing could be Socrates if it was not human [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: It seems natural to paraphrase the claim that Socrates is essentially human as the claim that nothing could be Socrates if it was not human. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 4.3) | |
A reaction: In ordinary speech it would be emphasising how very human Socrates was (in comparison with Frege, for example). By this token Socrates essentially breathes oxygen, but that is hardly part of his essence. |
16453 | The bundle theory makes the identity of indiscernibles a necessity, since the thing is the properties [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: On the bundle theory, the identity of indiscernibles (for 'individuals') is a necessary truth, since an individual is just the co-instantiation of all the properties represented by a point in the space of properties. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 3.6) | |
A reaction: So much the worse for the bundle theory, I presume. Leibniz did not, I think, hold a bundle theory, but his belief in the identity of indiscernibles seems to have had a theologicial underpinning. |
16466 | Strong necessity is always true; weak necessity is cannot be false [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: Prior had a strong and a weak reading of necessity, where strong necessity is truth in all possible worlds, while weak necessity is falsity in no possible world. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 4.3) | |
A reaction: [K.Fine 2005:Ch.9 is also cited] The point of the weak one is that in some worlds there might not exist the proposition which is the candidate for truth or falsehood. |
16438 | Necessity and possibility are fundamental, and there can be no reductive analysis of them [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: My view is that if there were a nonmodal analysis of the modal concepts, that would be a sure sign that we were on the wrong track. Necessity and possibility are fundamental concepts, like truth and existence. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 1.1) | |
A reaction: The mystery of modality is tied up with the mystery of time (which is a very big mystery indeed). You get a nice clear grip on the here and now, but time and motion whisk you away to something else. Modality concerns the something else. |
16436 | Modal concepts are central to the actual world, and shouldn't need extravagant metaphysics [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: Modal concepts are central to our understanding of the world - the actual world - and understanding them should not require extravagant metaphysical commitments. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 1) | |
A reaction: I agree. Personally I think powers and dispositions do the job nicely. You just have to embrace Leibniz's emphasis on the active nature of reality, and the implausible metaphysics starts to recede. |
16433 | Given actualism, how can there be possible individuals, other than the actual ones? [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: My main focus is on how, on an actualist interpretation of possible worlds as ways a world might be, one is to account for the possibility that there be individuals other than those that actually exist. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], Pref) | |
A reaction: The obvious thought would be that they are constructions from components of actual individuals, such as the chimaera, or fictional characters. We need some psychology here, which is not Stalnaker's style. |
16437 | Possible worlds are properties [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: Possible worlds are (to a first approximation) properties. [p.12] They are properties of the total universe. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 1) |
16444 | Possible worlds don't reduce modality, they regiment it to reveal its structure [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: It is not reduction (of modality) but regimentation that the possible-worlds framework provides - a procedure for representing modal discourse, using primitive modal notions, in a way that helps reveal its structure. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 1.2) | |
A reaction: I think this is exactly my view. All discussion of the ontology of possible worlds is irrelevant. They no more exist than variables in logic exist. They're good when they clarify, but dubious when they over-simplify. |
16445 | I think of worlds as cells (rather than points) in logical space [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: I prefer to think of the possible worlds not as points in logical space but as cells of a relatively fine-grained partition of logical space - a partition that makes all the distinctions we need. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 1.2) | |
A reaction: Since he regards possible worlds as simply a means of regimenting our understanding of modality, he can think of possible worlds in any way that suits him. I find it hard work tuning in to his vision. |
16454 | Modal properties depend on the choice of a counterpart, which is unconstrained by metaphysics [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: Things have modal properties only relative to the choice of a counterpart relation, and the choice between alternative counterpart relations is not constrained by the metaphysics. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 3.6) | |
A reaction: Stalnaker is sympathetic to counterparts, but this strikes me as a powerful objection to the theory. I take the modal properties of something to be fixed by its actuality. |
16450 | Anti-haecceitism says there is no more to an individual than meeting some qualitative conditions [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: The anti-haecceitist strategy holds that a purely qualitative characterisation of a possible world would be a complete characterisation; there is, on this view, nothing to being a particular individual other than meeting certain qualitative conditions. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 3) | |
A reaction: Not quite the same as the bundle theory of objects, which says the objects are the qualities. This is about individuation, not about ontology (I think). I don't like anti-haecceitism, but I also don't like haecceitism. Hmm. |
23207 | Appearance is the sole reality of things, to which all predicates refer [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: Appearance as I understand it is the actual and single reality of things - that which first merits all existing predicates. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 40[53]) | |
A reaction: This is the view espoused by John Stuart Mill (a fact which would shock Nietzsche!). Elsewhere he laughs at the concept of the thing-in-itself as a fiction. |
23197 | Memory is essential, and is only possible by means of abbreviation signs [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: Experience is only possible with the help of memory; memory is only possible by virtue of an abbreviation of an intellectual event as a sign. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[249]) | |
A reaction: My memory of a town is not formed as a sign, but as a bunch of miscellaneous fragments about it. I think mental files gives a better account of this than do 'signs'. |
23206 | Schematic minds think thoughts are truer if they slot into a scheme [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: There are schematic minds, those who hold a thought-complex to be truer if it can be sketched into previously drafted schemata or categorical tables. There are countless self-deceptions in this area: nearly all the great 'systems' belong here. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 40[09]) | |
A reaction: Why 'nearly all'? Aristotle might be a candidate for such a person. Leibniz, perhaps. Nietzsche identified with Becoming and Heraclitus, as opposed to Being and Parmenides. |
23209 | Each of our personal drives has its own perspective [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: From the standpoint of each of our fundamental drives there is a different perspectival assessment of all events and experiences. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 1[058]) | |
A reaction: Revealing. Perspectives are not just each individual person's viewpoint, but something more fine-grained than that. Our understanding and response are ambiguous, because we ourselves are intrinsically ambiguous. Super-relativism! |
23184 | The mind is a simplifying apparatus [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: The intellect and the senses are above all a simplifying apparatus. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[046]) | |
A reaction: Very plausible, and not an idea I have met elsewhere. There's a PhD here for someone. It fits with my view as universals in language (which is most of language), which capture diverse things by ironing out their differences. |
23190 | Consciousness is our awareness of our own mental life [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: We have a double brain: our capacity to will, to feel and to think of our willing, feeling, thinking ourselves is what we summarise with the word 'consciousness'. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[087]) | |
A reaction: Pretty much the modern HOT (higher order thought) theory of consciousness. Higher order thought distinguishes us from the other animals, but I think they too are probably conscious, so I don't agree. Why is level 2 conscious of level 1? |
23191 | Minds have an excluding drive to scare things off, and a selecting one to filter facts [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: In our conscious intellect there must be an excluding drive that scares things away, a selecting one, which only permits certain facts to present themselves. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[131]) | |
A reaction: I like this because he is endorsing the idea that philosophy needs faculties, which may not match the views of psychologists and neuroscientists. Quite nice to think of faculties as drives. |
23213 | The greatest drive of life is to discharge strength, rather than preservation [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: Something that lives wants above all to discharge its strength: 'preservation' is only one of the consequences of this. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 2[063]) | |
A reaction: This seems to fit a dynamic man like Nietzsche, rather than someone who opts for a quiet and comfortable life. |
23210 | That all events are necessary does not mean they are compelled [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: The absolute necessity of all events contains nothing of a compulsion. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 1[114]) | |
A reaction: I like to look for necessity-makers behind necessities. So if the event is not necessary because of its cause, where does it come from? Is it that the whole sequence is a unified necessity? |
16474 | How can we know what we are thinking, if content depends on something we don't know? [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: How can we know what we ourselves are thinking if the very existence of the content of our thought may depend on facts of which we are ignorant? | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 5) | |
A reaction: This has always been my main doubt about externalism. I may defer to experts about what I intend by an 'elm' (Putnam's example), but what I mean by elm is thereby a fuzzy tall tree with indeterminate leaves. I don't know the meaning of 'elm'! |
23189 | Concepts are rough groups of simultaneous sensations [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: Concepts are more or less definite groups of sensations that arrive together. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[086]) | |
A reaction: I like this because I favour accounts of concepts which root them in experience, and largely growing unthinking out of communcal experience. Nietzsche is very empirical here. Hume would probably agree. |
23192 | Concepts don’t match one thing, but many things a little bit [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: A concept is an invention that doesn't correspond entirely to anything; but to many things a little bit. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[131]) | |
A reaction: This seems to cover some concepts quite well, but others not at all. What else does 'square' correspond to? |
23187 | Whatever their origin, concepts survive by being useful [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: The most useful concepts have survived: however falsely they may have originated. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[063]) | |
A reaction: The germ of both pragmatism, and of meaning-as-use, here. The alternative views must be that the concepts are accurate or true, or that they are simply a matter of whim, maintained by authority. |
16461 | We still lack an agreed semantics for quantifiers in natural language [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: We still do not know how to give a direct semantics for the quantifiers of a natural language; that is something that we still do not know how to do (or at least how it is done remains controversial). | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 4) | |
A reaction: I am struck by how rapidly the domain of quantification changes, even in mid-sentence, in the course of an ordinary conversation. This is decided almost entirely by context, not by pure ('direct'?) semantics. |
16448 | Possible world semantics may not reduce modality, but it can explain it [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: Most theorists agree that possible worlds semantics cannot provide an analysis of modal concepts which is an eliminative reduction, but it can still provide an explanation of the meanings of modal expressions. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 2.2) | |
A reaction: Stalnaker cites Kit Fine for the view that there is no reduction of modality, which Fine takes to be primitive. Stalnaker defends the semantics, while denying the reduction which Lewis thought possible. |
23205 | Thought starts as ambiguity, in need of interpretation and narrowing [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: A thought in the shape in which it comes is an ambiguous sign that needs interpretation, more precisely, needs an arbitrary narrowing-down and limitation, until it finally becomes unambiguous. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 38[01]) | |
A reaction: This is exactly my view of propositions, as mental events. Introspect your thinking process. Track the progress from the first glimmer of a thought to its formulation in a finished sentence. Language, unlike propositions, can be ambiguous. |
16442 | I take propositions to be truth conditions [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: I will defend the view that propositions are truth conditions. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 1.2) | |
A reaction: This sounds close to the Russellian view, which I take to equate propositions (roughly) with facts or states of affairs. But are 'truth conditions' in the world or in the head? |
16447 | A theory of propositions at least needs primitive properties of consistency and of truth [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: A minimal theory of propositions can make do with just two primitive properties: a property of consistency applied to sets of propositions, and a property of truth applied to propositions. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 2) | |
A reaction: I would have thought a minimal theory would need some account of what a proposition is supposed to be (since there seems to be very little agreement about that). Stalnaker goes on to sketch a theory. |
16446 | Propositions presumably don't exist if the things they refer to don't exist [Stalnaker] |
Full Idea: It seems plausible that singular propositions are object-dependent in the sense that the proposition would not exist if the individual did not. It is also plausible that some objects exist contingently, and there are singular propositions about them. | |
From: Robert C. Stalnaker (Mere Possibilities [2012], 2) | |
A reaction: This replies to the view that possible worlds are maximal sets of propositions, and so must exist for the worlds to exist; e.g. Lowe 1999:248. That is yet another commonplace of contemporary philosophy which I find utterly bewildering. |
23198 | Aesthetics can be more basic than morality, in our pleasure in certain patterns of experience [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: Some of the aesthetic valuations are more fundamental than the moral ones e.g. the pleasure in what is ordered, surveyable, limited, in repetition. The logical, arithmetical and geometrical good feelings form the ground floor of aesthetic valuations. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 35[02]) | |
A reaction: Nietzsche's originality is so striking because his novel suggestions are always plausible. Lots of modern philosophers (especially, I fear, in the continental tradition) throw out startling ideas which then fail on closer inspection. |
23208 | Caesar and Napoleon point to the future, when they pursue their task regardless of human sacrifice [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: In nature's such as Caesar and Napoleon we intuit something of a 'disinterested' laboring on one's marble, regardless of any sacrifice of human beings. The future of the highest humans lies on this path: to bear responsibility and not collapse under it. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 1[056]) | |
A reaction: Hideous. Nietzsche at his absolute worst. You would think there was some wonderful higher good to which they were leading the human race, when they just strike me as people who liked fighting, and adored winning. |
23193 | Napoleon was very focused, and rightly ignored compassion [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: With Napoleon only the essential instincts of humanity came into consideration during his calculations, and he had a right not to take notice of the exceptional ones e.g. of compassion. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[131]) | |
A reaction: Napoleon was notoriously indifferent to casualties, and I find it depressing that Nietzsche supports him. Napoleon brought misery to Europe for nearly twenties, mainly because he loved winning battles. Nothing über about that. |
7903 | 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'). |
23214 | For the strongest people, nihilism gives you wings! [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: In the hands of the strongest every kind of pessimism and nihilism becomes only one more hammer and tool with which one mounts a new pair of wings on oneself. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 2[101]) | |
A reaction: Not sure how this works. Why is great strength needed? Strength implies forceful overcoming. The wings come from rejecting nihilism, but why does that need strength? Aren't there people with wings who never even thought of nihilism? |
23203 | The great question is approaching, of how to govern the earth as a whole [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: It is approaching, irrefutably, hesitatingly, terrible as fate, the great task and fate: how should the earth as a whole be governed? | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 37[08]) | |
A reaction: Two issues have accelerated the question, though we have yet to properly face it. One is the incredible increase in military destructiveness, and other is the damage to the planet caused by the relentless pursuit of wealth. |
23200 | The controlling morality of aristocracy is the desire to resemble their ancestors [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: The foundation of all aristocracies …is to resemble the ancestors as much as possible, which serves as the controlling morality: mourning at the thought of change and variation. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 35[22]) | |
A reaction: This makes sense of the permanent residence of the family, full of portraits and family trees. Aristocrats preserve records of their predecessors, in a way that most of us don't, going back before grandparents. |
23194 | People feel united as a nation by one language, but then want a common ancestry and history [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: People who speak one language and read the same newspapers today call themselves 'nations', and also want much too eagerly to be of common ancestry and history. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[203]) | |
A reaction: This sort of nationalism is still with us, as white supremacy, and as history as mythology. But we can't just shake off a sense of which gene pools we come from, and which lines of history are our personal inheritance. |
23204 | To be someone you need property, and wanting more is healthy [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: Property owners are to a man of one belief: 'you have to own something to be something'. But this is the oldest and healthiest of all instincts: I would add 'you have to want more than you have in order to become more'. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 37[11]) | |
A reaction: An odd idea from someone who spent his later years living in one room in a guest house. The context of this is a rejection of socialism. The love of and need for property and possessions must be taken into account in any politics. |
23195 | Laws of nature are actually formulas of power relations [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: The alleged 'laws of nature' are formulas for power relationships… | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[247]) | |
A reaction: Love it. This is precisely the powers ontology of modern philosophy of science. His Will to Power is not often recognised as closely related to this view. |
23185 | In chemistry every substance pushes, and thus creates new substances [Nietzsche] |
Full Idea: In chemistry is revealed that every substance pushes its force as far as it can, then a third something emerges. | |
From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 34[51]) | |
A reaction: This is the ontology of powers as the basis of science, of which I am a fan. It is Nietzsche's Will to Power in action, which is often mistakenly taken to only refer to human affairs. |