|
8147
|
We have an apparent and a true self; only the second one exists, and we must seek to know it [Anon (Upan)]
|
|
Full Idea:
There are two selves, the apparent self, and the real Self. Of these it is the real Self (Atman), and he alone, who must be felt as truly existing. To the man who has felt him as truly existing he reveals his innermost nature.
|
|
From:
Anon (Upan) (The Upanishads [c.950 BCE], 'Katha')
|
|
A reaction:
A central Hindu doctrine against which Buddhism rebelled, by denying the self altogether. I prefer the Hindu view. A desire to abandon the self just seems to be a desire for death. Knowledge of our essential self is more interesting. But see Idea 2932!
|
|
6213
|
A man cannot will to will, or will to will to will, so the idea of a voluntary will is absurd [Hobbes]
|
|
Full Idea:
The will is not voluntary: for a man can no more say he will will, than he will will will, and so make an infinite repetition of the word 'will', which is absurd and insignificant.
|
|
From:
Thomas Hobbes (Human Nature [1640], Ch.XII.5)
|
|
A reaction:
A nice simple point, allied to Nietzsche's notion that thoughts are uncontrollable (Idea 2291). Even Aquinas, who is quite a fan of free will, spotted the problem (Idea 1854). Personally I agree with Hobbes. Free will is a shibboleth.
|
|
8155
|
Without speech we cannot know right/wrong, true/false, good/bad, or pleasant/unpleasant [Anon (Upan)]
|
|
Full Idea:
If there were no speech, neither right nor wrong would be known, neither the true nor the false, neither the good nor the bad, neither the pleasant nor the unpleasant.
|
|
From:
Anon (Upan) (The Upanishads [c.950 BCE], 'Chandogya')
|
|
A reaction:
This could stand as the epigraph for the whole of modern philosophy of language. However, the text goes on to say that mind is higher than speech. The test question is the mental capabilities of animals. Do they 'know' pleasure, or truth?
|
|
6210
|
Life has no end (not even happiness), because we have desires, which presuppose a further end [Hobbes]
|
|
Full Idea:
For an utmost end, in which the ancient philosophers have placed felicity, there is no such thing in this world, nor way to it: for while we live, we have desires, and desire presupposeth a further end.
|
|
From:
Thomas Hobbes (Human Nature [1640], Ch.VII.6)
|
|
A reaction:
Kant's definition of happiness (Idea 1452) seems to be the underlying idea, and hence with the same implication (of impossibility). However, an alcoholic locked in a brewery would seem to have all that Hobbes requires for happiness.
|
|
6212
|
Lust involves pleasure, and also the sense of power in pleasing others [Hobbes]
|
|
Full Idea:
Lust consists of two appetites together, to please, and to be pleased, and the delight men take in delighting is not sensual, but a pleasure or joy of the mind consisting in the imagination of the power they have so much to please.
|
|
From:
Thomas Hobbes (Human Nature [1640], Ch.IX)
|
|
A reaction:
Hobbes would rather burst a blood-vessel than admit any altruism. If you take pleasure in pleasing someone else, why can't that simply be because of the other person's pleasure, with which we sympathise, rather than relishing our own 'power'?
|
|
8153
|
By knowing one piece of clay or gold, you know all of clay or gold [Anon (Upan)]
|
|
Full Idea:
By knowing one lump of clay, all things made of clay are known; by knowing a nugget of gold, all things made of gold are known.
|
|
From:
Anon (Upan) (The Upanishads [c.950 BCE], 'Chandogya')
|
|
A reaction:
I can't think of a better basic definition of a natural kind. There is an inductive assumption, of course, which hits trouble when you meet fool's gold, or two different sorts of jade. But the concept of a natural kind is no more than this.
|
|
8412
|
A causal interaction is when two processes intersect, and correlated modifications persist afterwards [Salmon]
|
|
Full Idea:
When two processes intersect, and they undergo correlated modifications which persist after the intersection, I shall say that the intersection is a causal interaction. I take this as a fundamental causal concept.
|
|
From:
Wesley Salmon (Causality: Production and Propagation [1980], §4)
|
|
A reaction:
There may be a problem individuating processes, just as there is for events. I like this approach to causation, which is ontologically sparse, and fits in with the scientific worldview. Change of properties sounds precise, but isn't. Stick to processes.
|
|
8413
|
Cause must come first in propagations of causal interactions, but interactions are simultaneous [Salmon]
|
|
Full Idea:
In a typical cause-effect situation (a 'propagation') cause must precede effect, for propagation over a finite time interval is an essential feature. In an 'interaction', an intersection of processes resulting in change, we have simultaneity.
|
|
From:
Wesley Salmon (Causality: Production and Propagation [1980], §8)
|
|
A reaction:
This takes the direction of time as axiomatic, and quite right too. Salmon isn't addressing the real difficulty, though, which is that the resultant laws are usually held to be time-reversible, which is a bit of a puzzle.
|
|
8411
|
Instead of localised events, I take enduring and extended processes as basic to causation [Salmon]
|
|
Full Idea:
I propose to approach causality by taking processes rather than events as basic entities. Events are relatively localised in space and time, while processes have much greater temporal duration, and, in many cases, much greater spatial extent.
|
|
From:
Wesley Salmon (Causality: Production and Propagation [1980], §2)
|
|
A reaction:
This strikes me as an incredibly promising proposal, not just in our understanding of causation, but for our general metaphysics and understanding of nature. See Idea 4931, for example. Vague events and processes blend into one another.
|
|
8154
|
Originally there must have been just Existence, which could not come from non-existence [Anon (Upan)]
|
|
Full Idea:
In the beginning there was Existence, One only, without a second. Some say that in the beginning there was non-existence only, and that out of that the universe was born. But how could such a thing be? How could existence be born of non-existence?
|
|
From:
Anon (Upan) (The Upanishads [c.950 BCE], 'Chandogya')
|
|
A reaction:
A very rare instance of an argument in the Upanishads, arising out of a disagreement. The monotheistic religions have preferred to make God the eternal element, presumably because that raises his status, but is also explains the start as a decision.
|
|
8148
|
Brahma, supreme god and protector of the universe, arose from the ocean of existence [Anon (Upan)]
|
|
Full Idea:
Out of the infinite ocean of existence arose Brahma, first-born and foremost among the gods. From him sprang the universe, and he became its protector.
|
|
From:
Anon (Upan) (The Upanishads [c.950 BCE], 'Mundaka')
|
|
A reaction:
Brahma does not have eternal (or necessary) existence. Could Brahma cease to exist? I suppose we cannot ask what caused the appearance of Brahma? Is it part of a plan, or just luck, or some sort of necessity?
|
|
8152
|
Earth, food, fire, sun are all forms of Brahman [Anon (Upan)]
|
|
Full Idea:
Earth, food, fire, sun - all these that you worship - are forms of Brahman.
|
|
From:
Anon (Upan) (The Upanishads [c.950 BCE], 'Chandogya')
|
|
A reaction:
In 'Taittiriya' food is named as the "chief of all things". Pantheism seems to arise from a desire that one's god should have every conceivable good, so in addition to power and knowledge, your god must keep you warm and healthy.
|
|
8156
|
The gods are not worshipped for their own sake, but for the sake of the Self [Anon (Upan)]
|
|
Full Idea:
It is not for the sake of the gods, my beloved, that the gods are worshipped, but for the sake of the Self (Atman).
|
|
From:
Anon (Upan) (The Upanishads [c.950 BCE], 'Brihadaranyaka')
|
|
A reaction:
There is an uneasy selfish streak in all religions, which conflicts with their exhorations to altruism, and to the love of the gods. It also occurs in the exhortation of Socrates to be virtuous. 'Pure' altruism seems only to arise in the 18th century.
|
|
8157
|
A man with desires is continually reborn, until his desires are stilled [Anon (Upan)]
|
|
Full Idea:
A man acts according to desires; after death he reaps the harvest of his deeds, and returns again to the world of action. Thus he who has desires continues subject to rebirth, but he in who desire is stilled suffers no rebirth.
|
|
From:
Anon (Upan) (The Upanishads [c.950 BCE], 'Brihadaranyaka')
|
|
A reaction:
I greatly prefer the Stoic idea (Idea 3066) that we should live according to nature, to this perverse longing to completely destroy our own nature and become something we are not. Play the cards you are dealt, which include desires.
|
|
8150
|
The immortal Self and the sad individual self are like two golden birds perched on one tree [Anon (Upan)]
|
|
Full Idea:
Like two birds of golden plumage, the individual self and the immortal Self perch on the branches of the same tree. The individual self, deluded by forgetfulness of his identity with the divine self, bewildered by his ego, grieves and is sad.
|
|
From:
Anon (Upan) (The Upanishads [c.950 BCE], 'Mundaka')
|
|
A reaction:
Hinduism gives a much clearer and bolder picture of the soul than Christianity does. I don't see much consolation in the immortality of the wonderful Self, if my individual self is doomed to misery and extinction. Which one is me?
|