Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Phaedo', 'Mereology' and 'Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong'

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


33 ideas

1. Philosophy / A. Wisdom / 1. Nature of Wisdom
Wisdom makes virtue and true goodness possible [Plato]
     Full Idea: It is wisdom that makes possible courage and self-control and integrity or, in a word, true goodness.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 069b)
     A reaction: Aristotle also says that prudence (phronesis) makes virtue possible.
1. Philosophy / D. Nature of Philosophy / 5. Aims of Philosophy / b. Philosophy as transcendent
Philosophy is a purification of the soul ready for the afterlife [Plato]
     Full Idea: Souls which have purified themselves sufficiently by philosophy will live after death without bodies.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 114b)
     A reaction: Purifying it of what? Error, or desire, or narrow-mindedness, or the physical?
2. Reason / A. Nature of Reason / 3. Pure Reason
In investigation the body leads us astray, but the soul gets a clear view of the facts [Plato]
     Full Idea: When philosophers investigate with the help of the body they are led astray, but through reflection the soul gets a clear view of the facts.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 065c)
2. Reason / A. Nature of Reason / 7. Status of Reason
The greatest misfortune for a person is to develop a dislike for argument [Plato]
     Full Idea: No greater misfortune could happen to anyone than developing a dislike for argument.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 089d)
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 4. Axioms for Sets / a. Axioms for sets
Maybe set theory need not be well-founded [Varzi]
     Full Idea: There are some proposals for non-well-founded set theory (tolerating cases of self-membership and membership circularities).
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 2.1)
     A reaction: [He cites Aczel 1988, and Barwise and Moss 1996]
4. Formal Logic / G. Formal Mereology / 1. Mereology
Mereology need not be nominalist, though it is often taken to be so [Varzi]
     Full Idea: While mereology was originally offered with a nominalist viewpoint, resulting in a conception of mereology as an ontologically parsimonious alternative to set theory, there is no necessary link between analysis of parthood and nominalism.
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 1)
     A reaction: He cites Lesniewski and Leonard-and-Goodman. Do you allow something called a 'whole' into your ontology, as well as the parts? He observes that while 'wholes' can be concrete, they can also be abstract, if the parts are abstract.
Are there mereological atoms, and are all objects made of them? [Varzi]
     Full Idea: It is an open question whether there are any mereological atoms (with no proper parts), and also whether every object is ultimately made up of atoms.
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 3)
     A reaction: Such a view would have to presuppose (metaphysically) that the divisibility of matter has limits. If one follows this route, then are there only 'natural' wholes, or are we 'unrestricted' in our view of how the atoms combine? I favour the natural route.
There is something of which everything is part, but no null-thing which is part of everything [Varzi]
     Full Idea: It is common in mereology to hold that there is something of which everything is part, but few hold that there is a 'null entity' that is part of everything.
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 4.1)
     A reaction: This comes out as roughly the opposite of set theory, which cannot do without the null set, but is not keen on the set of everything.
6. Mathematics / A. Nature of Mathematics / 4. Using Numbers / f. Arithmetic
If you add one to one, which one becomes two, or do they both become two? [Plato]
     Full Idea: I cannot convince myself that when you add one to one either the first or the second one becomes two, or they both become two by the addition of the one to the other, ...or that when you divide one, the cause of becoming two is now the division.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 097d)
     A reaction: Lovely questions, all leading to the conclusion that two consists of partaking in duality, to which you can come by several different routes.
8. Modes of Existence / A. Relations / 2. Internal Relations
If Simmias is taller than Socrates, that isn't a feature that is just in Simmias [Plato]
     Full Idea: When you say Simmias is taller than Socrates but shorter than Phaedo, so you mean there is in Simmias both tallness and shortness? - I do. ...But surely he is not taller than Socrates because he is Simmias but because of the tallness he happens to have?
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 102b-c)
     A reaction: He adds that both people must be cited. This appears to be what we now call a rejection relative height as an 'internal' relation, which is it would presumably be if it was a feature of one or of both men.
8. Modes of Existence / D. Universals / 6. Platonic Forms / a. Platonic Forms
We must have a prior knowledge of equality, if we see 'equal' things and realise they fall short of it [Plato]
     Full Idea: We must have some previous knowledge of equality, before the time when we saw equal things, but realised that they fell short of it.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 075a)
8. Modes of Existence / D. Universals / 6. Platonic Forms / b. Partaking
There is only one source for all beauty [Plato]
     Full Idea: If anything is beautiful other than beauty itself, it is beautiful for no other reason but because it participates in that beautiful.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 100c)
     A reaction: The Greek word will be 'kalon' (beautiful, fine, noble). Like Aristotle, I find it baffling that such diversity could have a single source. Beautiful things have diverse aims.
Other things are named after the Forms because they participate in them [Plato]
     Full Idea: The reason why other things are called after the forms is that they participate in the forms.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 102a)
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 5. Composition of an Object
'Composition is identity' says multitudes are the reality, loosely composing single things [Varzi]
     Full Idea: The thesis known as 'composition is identity' is that identity is mereological composition; a fusion is just the parts counted loosely, but it is strictly a multitude and loosely a single thing.
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 4.3)
     A reaction: [He cites D.Baxter 1988, in Mind] It is not clear, from this simple statement, what the difference is between multitudes that are parts of a thing, and multitudes that are not. A heavy weight seems to hang on the notion of 'composed of'.
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 8. Parts of Objects / a. Parts of objects
Parts may or may not be attached, demarcated, arbitrary, material, extended, spatial or temporal [Varzi]
     Full Idea: The word 'part' can used whether it is attached, or arbitrarily demarcated, or gerrymandered, or immaterial, or unextended, or spatial, or temporal.
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 1)
If 'part' is reflexive, then identity is a limit case of parthood [Varzi]
     Full Idea: Taking reflexivity as constitutive of the meaning of 'part' amounts to regarding identity as a limit case of parthood.
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 2.1)
     A reaction: A nice thought, but it is horribly 'philosophical', and a long way from ordinary usage and common sense (which is, I'm sorry to say, a BAD thing).
'Part' stands for a reflexive, antisymmetric and transitive relation [Varzi]
     Full Idea: It seems obvious that 'part' stands for a partial ordering, a reflexive ('everything is part of itself'), antisymmetic ('two things cannot be part of each other'), and transitive (a part of a part of a thing is part of that thing) relation.
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 2.1)
     A reaction: I'm never clear why the reflexive bit of the relation should be taken as 'obvious', since it seems to defy normal usage and common sense. It would be absurd to say 'I'll give you part of the cake' and hand you the whole of it. See Idea 10651.
The parthood relation will help to define at least seven basic predicates [Varzi]
     Full Idea: With a basic parthood relation, we can formally define various mereological predicates, such as overlap, underlap, proper part, over-crossing, under-crossing, proper overlap, and proper underlap.
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 2.2)
     A reaction: [Varzi offers some diagrams, but they need interpretation]
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 8. Parts of Objects / c. Wholes from parts
Sameness of parts won't guarantee identity if their arrangement matters [Varzi]
     Full Idea: We might say that sameness of parts is not sufficient for identity, as some entities may differ exclusively with respect to the arrangement of the parts, as when we compare 'John loves Mary' with 'Mary loves John'.
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 3.2)
     A reaction: Presumably wide dispersal should also prevent parts from fixing wholes, but there is so much vagueness here that it is tempting to go for unrestricted composition, and then work back to the common sense position.
9. Objects / E. Objects over Time / 9. Ship of Theseus
The ship which Theseus took to Crete is now sent to Delos crowned with flowers [Plato]
     Full Idea: The day before the trial the prow of the ship that the Athenians send to Delos had been crowned with garlands. - Which ship is that? - It is the ship in which, the Athenians say, Theseus once sailed to Crete, taking the victims.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 058a)
     A reaction: Not philosophical, but this is the Ship of Theseus whose subsequent identity, Plutarch tells us, became a matter of dispute.
10. Modality / D. Knowledge of Modality / 4. Conceivable as Possible / b. Conceivable but impossible
Conceivability may indicate possibility, but literary fantasy does not [Varzi]
     Full Idea: Conceivability may well be a guide to possibility, but literary fantasy is by itself no evidence of conceivability.
     From: Achille Varzi (Mereology [2003], 2.1)
     A reaction: Very nice. People who cite 'conceivability' in this context often have a disgracefully loose usage for the word. Really, really conceivable is probably our only guide to possibility.
12. Knowledge Sources / A. A Priori Knowledge / 3. Innate Knowledge / b. Recollection doctrine
People are obviously recollecting when they react to a geometrical diagram [Plato]
     Full Idea: The way in which people react to a geometrical diagram or anything like that is unmistakable proof of the theory of recollection.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 073a)
If we feel the inadequacy of a resemblance, we must recollect the original [Plato]
     Full Idea: If someone sees a resemblance, but feels that it falls far short of the original, they must therefore have a recollection of the original.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 074e)
12. Knowledge Sources / A. A Priori Knowledge / 6. A Priori from Reason
To achieve pure knowledge, we must get rid of the body and contemplate things with the soul [Plato]
     Full Idea: We are convinced that if we are ever to have pure knowledge of anything, we must get rid of the body and contemplate things by themselves with the soul by itself.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 066c)
     A reaction: This seems to be the original ideal which motivates the devotion to a priori knowledge - that it will lead to a 'pure' knowledge, which in Plato's case will be eternal and necessary knowledge, like taking lessons from the gods. Wrong.
14. Science / D. Explanation / 2. Types of Explanation / g. Causal explanations
To investigate the causes of things, study what is best for them [Plato]
     Full Idea: If one wished to know the cause of each thing, why it comes to be or perishes or exists, one had to find what was the best way for it to be, or to be acted upon, or to act. Then it befitted a man to investigate only ...what is best.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 097d)
     A reaction: A reversal of the modern idea of 'best explanation'. Socrates is citing Anaxagoras's proposal to understand things by interpreting the workings of a supreme Mind. It is the religious version of best explanation.
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 8. Brain
Do we think and experience with blood, air or fire, or could it be our brain? [Plato]
     Full Idea: Is it with the blood that we think, or with the air or the fire that is in us? Or is it none of these, but the brain that supplies our senses of hearing and sight and smell.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 097a)
     A reaction: In retrospect it seems surprising that such clever people hadn't worked this one out, given the evidence of anatomy, in animals and people, and given brain injuries. By the time of Galen they appear to have got the answer.
16. Persons / D. Continuity of the Self / 1. Identity and the Self
One soul can't be more or less of a soul than another [Plato]
     Full Idea: Is one soul, even minutely, more or less of a soul than another? Not in the least.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 093b)
     A reaction: This idea is attractive because unconsciousness and death seem to be abrupt procedures, and so appear to be all-or-nothing, but I would personally view extreme Alzheimer's as an erasing of the soul, though a minimum level of it seems all-or-nothing.
22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 1. Nature of Ethics / f. Ethical non-cognitivism
The 'error theory' of morals says there is no moral knowledge, because there are no moral facts [Mackie, by Engel]
     Full Idea: Mackie's 'error theory' of ethics says that if a fact is something that corresponds to a true proposition, there are actually no moral facts, hence no knowledge of what moral statements are about.
     From: report of J.L. Mackie (Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong [1977]) by Pascal Engel - Truth §4.2
     A reaction: Personally I am inclined to think that there are moral facts (about what nature shows us constitutes a good human being), based on virtue theory. Mackie is a good warning, though, against making excessive claims. You end up like a bad scientist.
22. Metaethics / C. The Good / 3. Pleasure / e. Role of pleasure
It is a mistake to think that the most violent pleasure or pain is therefore the truest reality [Plato]
     Full Idea: When anyone's soul feels a keen pleasure or pain it cannot help supposing that whatever causes the most violent emotion is the plainest and truest reality - which it is not.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 084c)
     A reaction: Do people think that? Most people distinguish subjective from objective. Wounded soldiers are also aware of victory or defeat.
23. Ethics / C. Virtue Theory / 4. External Goods / c. Wealth
War aims at the acquisition of wealth, because we are enslaved to the body [Plato]
     Full Idea: All wars are undertaken for the acquisition of wealth, and we want this because of the body, to which we are slave.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 066c)
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 2. Types of cause
Fancy being unable to distinguish a cause from its necessary background conditions! [Plato]
     Full Idea: Fancy being unable to distinguish between the cause of a thing, and the condition without which it could not be a cause.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 099c)
     A reaction: Not as simple as he thinks. It seems fairly easy to construct a case where the immediately impacting event remains constant, and the background condition is changed. Even worse when negligence is held to be the cause.
27. Natural Reality / E. Cosmology / 1. Cosmology
If the Earth is spherical and in the centre, it is kept in place by universal symmetry, not by force [Plato]
     Full Idea: If the earth is spherical and in the middle of the heavens, it needs neither air nor force to keep it from falling. The uniformity of heaven and equilibrium of earth are sufficient support.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 108e)
29. Religion / D. Religious Issues / 2. Immortality / a. Immortality
Whether the soul pre-exists our body depends on whether it contains the ultimate standard of reality [Plato]
     Full Idea: The theory that our soul exists even before it enters the body surely stands or falls with the soul's possession of the ultimate standard of reality.
     From: Plato (Phaedo [c.382 BCE], 092d)