14 ideas
7914 | To try to be wise all on one's own is folly [Rochefoucauld] |
Full Idea: To try to be wise all on one's own is sheer folly. | |
From: La Rochefoucauld (Maxims [1663], 231) | |
A reaction: I agree strongly with this. There are counter-examples, of whom Spinoza may be the greatest, and Nietzsche thought that philosophy was essentially a solitary business, but most of us are not Spinoza or Nietzsche. |
18617 | Substances, unlike aggregates, can survive a change of parts [Mumford] |
Full Idea: Substances can survive a change in their parts in a way that a mere aggregate of parts. | |
From: Stephen Mumford (Metaphysics: a very short introduction [2012], 3) | |
A reaction: A simple but very important idea. If we then distinguish between 'substances' and 'aggregates' we get a much clearer grip on things. Is the Ship of Theseus a substance or an aggregate? There is no factual answer to that. What do you want to explain? |
18618 | Maybe possibilities are recombinations of the existing elements of reality [Mumford] |
Full Idea: It has been suggested that we could think of possibilities as recombinations of all the existing elements of reality. | |
From: Stephen Mumford (Metaphysics: a very short introduction [2012], 8) | |
A reaction: [Armstrong 1989 is the source] The obvious problem would be that the existence of an entirely different reality would be impossible, if this was all possibility could be. It seems to cramp the style of the possible too much. Are properties elements? |
18619 | Combinatorial possibility has to allow all elements to be combinable, which seems unlikely [Mumford] |
Full Idea: The combinatorial account only works if you allow that the elements are recombinable. ...But could Lincoln really have been green? It seems possible that you could jump to the moon, unless we impose some restrictions. | |
From: Stephen Mumford (Metaphysics: a very short introduction [2012], 8) | |
A reaction: Mumford suggests different combination rules for logical and natural possibility. The general objection is that combinatorial possibility is too permissive - which it clearly is. |
18620 | Combinatorial possibility relies on what actually exists (even over time), but there could be more [Mumford] |
Full Idea: Can combinatorial possibility deliver enough possibilities? It uses the existing elements, but there might have been one more particular or one more property. Even extended over time, the elements seem finite, yet there could have been more. | |
From: Stephen Mumford (Metaphysics: a very short introduction [2012], 8) | |
A reaction: [compressed] One objection is that the theory allows too much, and now the objection is that it allows too little. Both objections are correct, so that's the end of that. But I admire the attempt to base modality on actuality. |
7118 | La Rochefoucauld's idea of disguised self-love implies an unconscious mind [Rochefoucauld, by Sartre] |
Full Idea: La Rochefoucauld is one of the first to have made use of the unconscious without naming it: for him, amour-propre conceals itself in the most diverse disguises. | |
From: report of La Rochefoucauld (Maxims [1663]) by Jean-Paul Sartre - Transcendence of the Ego I (C) | |
A reaction: It seems odd that no one before that ever thought that someone might have hidden motives of which even they themselves were unaware. How about Iago, or Macbeth, or Hamlet? It is a profound change in our view of human nature. |
7912 | Judging by effects, love looks more like hatred than friendship [Rochefoucauld] |
Full Idea: If love be judged by its most visible effects it looks more like hatred than friendship. | |
From: La Rochefoucauld (Maxims [1663], 072) | |
A reaction: Presumably he is thinking of pursuit, possession and jealousy. The remark is plausible if you add the word 'sometimes' to it, but as a universal generalisation it is ridiculous, the product of a society where they competed to exceed in cynicism. |
7915 | Supreme cleverness is knowledge of the real value of things [Rochefoucauld] |
Full Idea: Supreme cleverness is knowledge of the real value of things. | |
From: La Rochefoucauld (Maxims [1663], 244) | |
A reaction: Good. Right at the heart of wisdom is some kind of grasp of right values. It is so complex and subtle that it seems like pure intuition, but I am sure that reason is involved. 'Intelligent' people tend to be better at it. Some justifications can be given. |
7917 | Realising our future misery is a kind of happiness [Rochefoucauld] |
Full Idea: To realise how much misery we have to face is in itself a kind of happiness. | |
From: La Rochefoucauld (Maxims [1663], 570) | |
A reaction: Probably true. Knowing that you have got hold of the truth is a sort of happiness in any area, no matter how grim the truth. However, a happy life could easily be poisoned by brooding on the future. Should the happily married brood on future solitude? |
7913 | Virtue doesn't go far without the support of vanity [Rochefoucauld] |
Full Idea: Virtue would not go far without vanity to bear it company. | |
From: La Rochefoucauld (Maxims [1663], 200) | |
A reaction: Rochefoucauld's cynicism gets a bit tedious, but lovers of virtue must face up to this possibility when they consider what motivates them. At the heart of Aristotle there is a missing question, of what is so good about right-functioning and virtue. |
7916 | True friendship is even rarer than true love [Rochefoucauld] |
Full Idea: Rare though true love may be, true friendship is rarer still. | |
From: La Rochefoucauld (Maxims [1663], 473) | |
A reaction: This seems to be true. Our culture doesn't encourage friendship as a high ideal. Are women better at friendship than men? Which culture, past or present, led to the greatest flourishing of friendship? Epicurus's Garden? |
9299 | We are bored by people to whom we ourselves are boring [Rochefoucauld] |
Full Idea: Almost always we are bored by people to whom we ourselves are boring. | |
From: La Rochefoucauld (Maxims [1663], 555) | |
A reaction: An obvious exception would be a celebrity being bored with their fans. Their very excess of interest is precisely what is boring. If two people communicate well, it is unlikely that either of them will ever be bored. |
16713 | Philosophers are the forefathers of heretics [Tertullian] |
Full Idea: Philosophers are the forefathers of heretics. | |
From: Tertullian (works [c.200]), quoted by Robert Pasnau - Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 20.2 |
6610 | I believe because it is absurd [Tertullian] |
Full Idea: I believe because it is absurd ('Credo quia absurdum est'). | |
From: Tertullian (works [c.200]), quoted by Robert Fogelin - Walking the Tightrope of Reason n4.2 | |
A reaction: This seems to be a rather desperate remark, in response to what must have been rather good hostile arguments. No one would abandon the support of reason if it was easy to acquire. You can't deny its engaging romantic defiance, though. |