Combining Texts

All the ideas for '', 'Form, Matter and Substance' and 'Introduction to the Philosophy of History'

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


16 ideas

1. Philosophy / C. History of Philosophy / 4. Later European Philosophy / d. Nineteenth century philosophy
Hegel inserted society and history between the God-world, man-nature, man-being binary pairs [Hegel, by Safranski]
     Full Idea: Before Hegel, people thought in binary oppositions of God and the world, man and nature, man and being. After Hegel an intervening world of society and history was inserted between these pairs.
     From: report of Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840]) by Rüdiger Safranski - Nietzsche: a philosophical biography 05
     A reaction: This is what Popper later called 'World Three'. This might be seen as the start of what we islanders call 'continental' philosophy, which we have largely ignored. Analytic philosophy only discovered this through philosophy of language.
1. Philosophy / E. Nature of Metaphysics / 1. Nature of Metaphysics
Much metaphysical debate concerns what is fundamental, rather than what exists [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: Some of the most important debates in metaphysics or ontology do not concern existential questions, but focus on questions of fundamentality.
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Form, Matter and Substance [2018], 5 Intro)
     A reaction: In modern times we have added the structure of existence to the mere ontological catalogue, and this idea makes another important addition to our concept of metaphysics. She gives disagreement over tropes as an example.
5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 1. Overview of Logic
If a sound conclusion comes from two errors that cancel out, the path of the argument must matter [Rumfitt]
     Full Idea: If a designated conclusion follows from the premisses, but the argument involves two howlers which cancel each other out, then the moral is that the path an argument takes from premisses to conclusion does matter to its logical evaluation.
     From: Ian Rumfitt ("Yes" and "No" [2000], II)
     A reaction: The drift of this is that our view of logic should be a little closer to the reasoning of ordinary language, and we should rely a little less on purely formal accounts.
5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 2. Logical Connectives / a. Logical connectives
Standardly 'and' and 'but' are held to have the same sense by having the same truth table [Rumfitt]
     Full Idea: If 'and' and 'but' really are alike in sense, in what might that likeness consist? Some philosophers of classical logic will reply that they share a sense by virtue of sharing a truth table.
     From: Ian Rumfitt ("Yes" and "No" [2000])
     A reaction: This is the standard view which Rumfitt sets out to challenge.
The sense of a connective comes from primitively obvious rules of inference [Rumfitt]
     Full Idea: A connective will possess the sense that it has by virtue of its competent users' finding certain rules of inference involving it to be primitively obvious.
     From: Ian Rumfitt ("Yes" and "No" [2000], III)
     A reaction: Rumfitt cites Peacocke as endorsing this view, which characterises the logical connectives by their rules of usage rather than by their pure semantic value.
9. Objects / B. Unity of Objects / 1. Unifying an Object / a. Intrinsic unification
Structured wholes are united by the teamwork needed for their capacities [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: A structured whole derives its unity from the way in which its parts interact with other parts to allow both the whole and its parts to manifest those of their capacities which require 'team work' among the parts.
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Form, Matter and Substance [2018], Intro)
     A reaction: This is a culminating thesis of her book. She defends it at length. It looks like a nice theory for things which are lucky enough to have capacities involving teamwork. Does this mean a pebble can't be unified? She wants a dynamic view.
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 2. Hylomorphism / a. Hylomorphism
The form explains kind, structure, unity and activity [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: Hylomorphists tend to agree that the form (rather than matter) explains 1) kind membership, 2) structure, 3) unity, 4) characteristic activities.
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Form, Matter and Substance [2018], 3.2.1)
     A reaction: [compressed; she explains each of them] Personally I would add continuity through change (statue/clay). Glad to see that kind membership is not part of the form. And what about explaining observed properties? Does form=essence?
9. Objects / D. Essence of Objects / 3. Individual Essences
Hylomorphic compounds need an individual form for transworld identity [Koslicki]
     Full Idea: It is difficult to see how forms could serve as cross-world identity principles for hylomorphic compounds, unless these forms are particular or individual entities.
     From: Kathrin Koslicki (Form, Matter and Substance [2018], 3.4.3)
     A reaction: This is a key part of her objection to treating the form as universal or generic. I agree with her view.
19. Language / F. Communication / 3. Denial
We learn 'not' along with affirmation, by learning to either affirm or deny a sentence [Rumfitt]
     Full Idea: The standard view is that affirming not-A is more complex than affirming the atomic sentence A itself, with the latter determining its sense. But we could learn 'not' directly, by learning at once how to either affirm A or reject A.
     From: Ian Rumfitt ("Yes" and "No" [2000], IV)
     A reaction: [compressed] This seems fairly anti-Fregean in spirit, because it looks at the psychology of how we learn 'not' as a way of clarifying what we mean by it, rather than just looking at its logical behaviour (and thus giving it a secondary role).
22. Metaethics / C. The Good / 2. Happiness / a. Nature of happiness
World history has no room for happiness [Hegel]
     Full Idea: World history is not the place for happiness. Periods of happiness are empty pages in history.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: Clearly, Hegel thinks the progress of world history is much more important than happiness. This idea gives backing to those who don't care much about the casualties on either side in a major war.
24. Political Theory / A. Basis of a State / 1. A People / b. The natural life
The state of nature is one of untamed brutality [Hegel]
     Full Idea: The 'state of nature' is not an ideal condition, but a condition of injustice, of violence, of untamed natural drives, inhuman acts and emotions.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: He agrees with Hobbes, and disagrees with Rousseau. Hobbes's solution is authoritarian monarchy, but Hegel's solution is the unified and focused state, in which freedom can be realised.
24. Political Theory / A. Basis of a State / 1. A People / c. A unified people
The soul of the people is an organisation of its members which produces an essential unity [Hegel]
     Full Idea: The soul [of the people] exists only insofar as it is an organisation of its members, which - by taking itself together in its simple unity - produce the soul. Thus the people is one individuality in its essence.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: Hegel is seen (e.g. by Charles Taylor) as the ancestor of a rather attractive communitarianism, but I think Popper is more accurate in seeing him as the first stage of modern totalitarianism. The people seen as one individual terrifies me.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 6. Liberalism / g. Liberalism critique
The human race matters, and individuals have little importance [Hegel]
     Full Idea: Individuals are of slight importance compared to the mass of the human race.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: A perfect statement of the anti-liberal viewpoint. Hegel is complex, but this is the strand that leads to ridiculous totalitarianism, where the highest ideal is to die for the glory of your nation. Importance can only start from individuals.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 14. Nationalism
In a good state the goal of the citizens and of the whole state are united [Hegel]
     Full Idea: A state is well constituted and internally strong if the private interest of the citizens is united in the universal goal of the state.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: The obvious question is who decides on the goals, and what to do with the citizens who don't accept them.
25. Social Practice / A. Freedoms / 5. Freedom of lifestyle
The goal of the world is Spirit's consciousness and enactment of freedom [Hegel]
     Full Idea: The final goal of the world is Spirit's consciousness of its freedom, and hence also the actualisation of that very freedom.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 3)
     A reaction: I have the impression that this ridiculous idea has been very influential in modern French philosophy, since they all seem to be dreaming of some perfect freedom at the end of the rainbow. Freedom is good, but this gives it a bad name.
25. Social Practice / E. Policies / 5. Education / d. Study of history
We should all agree that there is reason in history [Hegel]
     Full Idea: We ought to have the firm and unconquerable belief that there is reason in history.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Introduction to the Philosophy of History [1840], 2)
     A reaction: This is a ridiculous but hugely influential idea, and I have no idea what makes Hegel believe it. It is the Stoic idea that nature is intrinsically rational, but extending it to human history is absurd. Human exceptionalism. Needs a dose of Darwin.