Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'fragments/reports', 'Laughter' and 'Philosophy and Politics'

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


11 ideas

1. Philosophy / D. Nature of Philosophy / 8. Humour
Amusement rests on superiority, or relief, or incongruity [Scruton]
     Full Idea: There are three common accounts of amusement: superiority theories (Hobbes's 'sudden glory'), 'relief from restraint' (Freud on jokes), and 'incongruity' theories (Schopenhauer).
     From: Roger Scruton (Laughter [1982], §5)
     A reaction: All three contain some truth. But one need not feel superior to laugh, and one may already be in a state of unrestraint. Schopenhauer seems closest to a good general account.
The central object of amusement is the human [Scruton]
     Full Idea: There are amusing buildings, but not amusing rocks and cliffs. If I were to propose a candidate for the formal object of amusement, then the human would be my choice, ...or at least emphasise its centrality.
     From: Roger Scruton (Laughter [1982], §9)
     A reaction: Sounds good. Animal behaviour only seems to amuse if it evokes something human. Plants would have to look a bit human to be funny.
Since only men laugh, it seems to be an attribute of reason [Scruton]
     Full Idea: Man is the only animal that laughs, so a starting point for all enquiries into laughter must be the hypothesis that it is an attribute of reason (though that gets us no further than our definition of reason).
     From: Roger Scruton (Laughter [1982], §1)
     A reaction: I would be inclined to say that both our capacity for reason and our capacity for laughter (and, indeed, our capacity for language) are a consequence of our evolved capacity for meta-thought.
Objects of amusement do not have to be real [Scruton]
     Full Idea: It is a matter of indifference whether the object of amusement be thought to be real.
     From: Roger Scruton (Laughter [1982], §7)
     A reaction: Sort of. If I say 'wouldn't it be funny if someone did x?', it is probably much less funny than if I say 'apparently he really did x'. The fantasy case has to be much funnier to evoke the laughter.
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 5. Rationality / a. Rationality
Only rational beings are attentive without motive or concern [Scruton]
     Full Idea: It is only rational beings who can be attentive without a motive; only rational beings who can be interested in that in which they have no interest.
     From: Roger Scruton (Laughter [1982], §12)
     A reaction: Rational beings make long term plans, so they cannot prejudge which things may turn out to be of interest to them. Scruton (a Kantian) makes it sound a little loftier than it actually is.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 5. Democracy / f. Against democracy
Democratic institutions become impossible in a fanatical democracy [Russell]
     Full Idea: Even democracy, when it becomes fanatical, as it did …in the French Revolution, ceases to be Liberal. Indeed, a fanatical belief in democracy makes democratic institutions impossible.
     From: Bertrand Russell (Philosophy and Politics [1950], p.26)
     A reaction: Presumably this is because the supposed 'will of the people' is continually placed in opposition to the institutions. For example, there is a problem if a referendum is held, which produces a result in conflict with the institutions.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 6. Liberalism / a. Liberalism basics
Liberal opinions are tentative rather than dogmatic, and are always responsive to new evidence [Russell]
     Full Idea: The essence of the Liberal outlook lies ...in how opinions are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively (as they are in science), and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.
     From: Bertrand Russell (Philosophy and Politics [1950], p.26)
     A reaction: A nice assessment. Russell shows himself finally to be a Liberal. This flexible approach to opinions is what infuriates dogmatists from both the left and the right. It might be said that the basic evidence rarely changes.
Empiricist Liberalism is the only view for someone who favours scientific evidence and happiness [Russell]
     Full Idea: Empiricist Liberalism (not incompatible with democratic socialism) is, as in Locke's time, the only philosophy that can be adopted by a man who demands some scientific evidence for beliefs, and also desires human happiness more than some party or creed.
     From: Bertrand Russell (Philosophy and Politics [1950], p.31)
     A reaction: I like this way of presenting liberalism. In the modern world we are sunk if we don't pay attention to experts, so we all need a critical understanding of what counts as good evidence. Tricky in a world of lying media.
Empiricism is ethically superior, because dogmatism favours persecution and hatred [Russell]
     Full Idea: Empiricism is to be commended not only on the grounds of its greater truth, but also on ethical grounds. Dogma demands authority rather than intelligent thought; it requires persecution of heretics and unbelievers, and favours systematic hatred.
     From: Bertrand Russell (Philosophy and Politics [1950], p.31)
     A reaction: He links empiricism with the liberal outlook. At its best, the respect by empiricists for evidence is a sort of humility.
25. Social Practice / E. Policies / 5. Education / b. Education principles
Learned men gain more in one day than others do in a lifetime [Posidonius]
     Full Idea: In a single day there lies open to men of learning more than there ever does to the unenlightened in the longest of lifetimes.
     From: Posidonius (fragments/reports [c.95 BCE]), quoted by Seneca the Younger - Letters from a Stoic 078
     A reaction: These remarks endorsing the infinite superiority of the educated to the uneducated seem to have been popular in late antiquity. It tends to be the religions which discourage great learning, especially in their emphasis on a single book.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / d. Time as measure
Time is an interval of motion, or the measure of speed [Posidonius, by Stobaeus]
     Full Idea: Posidonius defined time thus: it is an interval of motion, or the measure of speed and slowness.
     From: report of Posidonius (fragments/reports [c.95 BCE]) by John Stobaeus - Anthology 1.08.42
     A reaction: Hm. Can we define motion or speed without alluding to time? Looks like we have to define them as a conjoined pair, which means we cannot fully understand either of them.