|
5893
|
A wise man has integrity, firmness of will, nobility, consistency, sobriety, patience [Cicero]
|
|
Full Idea:
The wise man does nothing of which he can repent, nothing against his will, does everything nobly, consistently, soberly, rightly, not looking forward to anything as bound to come, is not astonished at any novel occurrence, abides by his own decisions.
|
|
From:
M. Tullius Cicero (Tusculan Disputations [c.44 BCE], V.xxviii)
|
|
A reaction:
Notice that the wise man never exhibits weakness of will (an Aristotelian virtue), and is consistent (as Kant proposed), and is patient (as the Stoics proposed). But Cicero doesn't think he should busy himself maximising happiness.
|
|
5884
|
How can one mind perceive so many dissimilar sensations? [Cicero]
|
|
Full Idea:
Why is it that, using the same mind, we have perception of things so utterly unlike as colour, taste, heat, smell and sound?
|
|
From:
M. Tullius Cicero (Tusculan Disputations [c.44 BCE], I.xx.47)
|
|
A reaction:
This leaves us with the 'binding problem', of how the dissimilar sensations are pulled together into one field of experience. It is a nice simple objection, though, to anyone who simplistically claims that the mind is self-evidently unified.
|
|
5887
|
The soul has a single nature, so it cannot be divided, and hence it cannot perish [Cicero]
|
|
Full Idea:
In souls there is no mingling of ingredients, nothing of two-fold nature, so it is impossible for the soul to be divided; impossible, therefore, for it to perish either; for perishing is like the separation of parts which were maintained in union.
|
|
From:
M. Tullius Cicero (Tusculan Disputations [c.44 BCE], I.xxix.71)
|
|
A reaction:
Cicero knows he is pushing his luck in asserting that perishing is a sort of division. Why can't something be there one moment and gone the next? He appears to be in close agreement with Descartes about being a 'thinking thing'.
|
|
9152
|
If green is abstracted from a thing, it is only seen as a type if it is common to many things [Fine,K]
|
|
Full Idea:
In traditional abstraction, the colour green merely has the intrinsic property of being green, other properties of things being abstracted away. But why should that be regarded as a type? It must be because the property is common to the instances.
|
|
From:
Kit Fine (Cantorian Abstraction: Recon. and Defence [1998], §5)
|
|
A reaction:
A nice question which shows that the much-derided single act of abstraction is not sufficient to arrive at a concept, so that abstraction is a more complex matter (perhaps even a rational one) than simple empiricists believe.
|
|
5886
|
Like the eye, the soul has no power to see itself, but sees other things [Cicero]
|
|
Full Idea:
The soul has not the power of itself to see itself, but, like the eye, the soul, though it does not see itself, yet discerns other things.
|
|
From:
M. Tullius Cicero (Tusculan Disputations [c.44 BCE], I.xxvii)
|
|
A reaction:
The soul is a complex item which contributes many layers of interpretation to what it sees, so there is scope for parts of the soul seeing other parts. Somewhere in the middle Cicero seems to be right - there is an elusive something we can't get at.
|
|
5885
|
Souls contain no properties of elements, and elements contain no properties of souls [Cicero]
|
|
Full Idea:
No beginnings of souls can be found on earth; there is no combination in souls that could be born from earth, nothing that partakes of moist or airy or fiery; for in those elements there is nothing to possess the power of memory, thought, or reflection.
|
|
From:
M. Tullius Cicero (Tusculan Disputations [c.44 BCE], I.xxvi.66)
|
|
A reaction:
Interesting, but I think magnetism is an instructive analogy, which has weird properties which we never perceive in elements (though it is there, buried deep - suggesting panpsychism). Cicero would be disconcerted to find that fire isn't an element.
|
|
9146
|
After abstraction all numbers seem identical, so only 0 and 1 will exist! [Fine,K]
|
|
Full Idea:
In Cantor's abstractionist account there can only be two numbers, 0 and 1. For abs(Socrates) = abs(Plato), since their numbers are the same. So the number of {Socrates,Plato} is {abs(Soc),abs(Plato)}, which is the same number as {Socrates}!
|
|
From:
Kit Fine (Cantorian Abstraction: Recon. and Defence [1998], §1)
|
|
A reaction:
Fine tries to answer this objection, which arises from §45 of Frege's Grundlagen. Fine summarises that "indistinguishability without identity appears to be impossible". Maybe we should drop talk of numbers in terms of sets.
|
|
7590
|
Consequentialism emphasises value rather than obligation in morality [Scruton]
|
|
Full Idea:
According to consequentialism, the fundamental concept of morality is not obligation (deontological ethics) but value (axiological ethics).
|
|
From:
Roger Scruton (A Dictionary of Political Thought [1982], 'consequentialism')
|
|
A reaction:
These two views could come dramatically apart, in wartime, or in big ecological crises, or in a family breakup, or in religious disputes. Having identified the pair so clearly, why can we not aim for a civilised (virtuous) balance between the two?
|
|
7589
|
Altruism is either emotional (where your interests are mine) or moral (where they are reasons for me) [Scruton]
|
|
Full Idea:
Two distinct motives go by the name of altruism: the emotions of liking, love and friendship, making another's interest automatically mine; and the moral motive of respect or considerateness, where another's interests become reasons for me, but not mine.
|
|
From:
Roger Scruton (A Dictionary of Political Thought [1982], 'altruism')
|
|
A reaction:
The second one has a strongly Kantian flavour, with its notion of impersonal duty. Virtue theorists will aspire to achieve the first state rather than the second, because good actions are then actively desired, and give pleasure to the doer.
|
|
7593
|
Liberals focus on universal human freedom, natural rights, and tolerance [Scruton, by PG]
|
|
Full Idea:
Liberalism believes (roughly) in the supremacy of the individual, who has freedom and natural rights; it focuses on human, not divine affairs; it claims rights and duties are universal; and it advocates tolerance in religion and morality.
|
|
From:
report of Roger Scruton (A Dictionary of Political Thought [1982], 'liberalism') by PG - Db (ideas)
|
|
A reaction:
I find it hard to disagree with these principles, but the upshot in practice is often an excessive commitment to freedom and tolerance, because people fail to realise the subtle long-term erosions of society that can result.
|
|
7587
|
The issue of abortion seems insoluble, because there is nothing with which to compare it [Scruton]
|
|
Full Idea:
The issue of abortion is intractable, partly because of the absence of any other case to which it can be assimilated.
|
|
From:
Roger Scruton (A Dictionary of Political Thought [1982], 'abortion')
|
|
A reaction:
This is the legalistic approach to the problem, which always looks for precedents and comparisons. All problems must hav solutions, though (mustn't they?). The problem, though, is not the value of the foetus, but the unique form of 'ownership'.
|