Evidence versus Proof

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reconstructo
 
Reply Mon 28 Dec, 2009 05:32 pm
@Fido,
Fido;114489 wrote:
If it is a serious question, then the answer is that Plato lived on his dreams the same as everyone else...


I agree with this. I was actually talking about his income, how he fed himself. It's easy to crack on the sophists for making a buck if one has private means. Plato is the priest/artist type, it seems. I like this type, but I don't like this type spitting on those who work. Yeah, we all live on our dreams. I agree. And dreams are made partly from words.
 
Fido
 
Reply Mon 28 Dec, 2009 07:16 pm
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;115044 wrote:
I agree with this. I was actually talking about his income, how he fed himself. It's easy to crack on the sophists for making a buck if one has private means. Plato is the priest/artist type, it seems. I like this type, but I don't like this type spitting on those who work. Yeah, we all live on our dreams. I agree. And dreams are made partly from words.

So he was rich...That is no excuse for him being an esshole...You have to want it, you know, to be an ess... Look at some one like Aristippus... There is a philosopher for the masses...He didn't have to have money to act like it...He was not averse to accepting the spit of a tyrant, or kneeling before him...He had wisdom and the tyrant had money so it was a fair trade...I love the story about him spitting in the face of a rich man because in the man's beautiful house he could find no better place... He left his daughter with the lesson to never put a value on anything she could live without...Plato, sold into slavery by the father, and volunteered as slave to the son, never could free himself from the tyranny of the ideal...Men and mankind were never perfect enough for Plato...It was he that needed the work....At least the age was not completely bare of human beings...

You know, philosophy to those people was luxury built upon slavery and the veins of Attic silver...I will try to find the words of Aristotle in Metaphysics, where he said something like philosophy was enjoyable because it was engaged in for no particular purpose, as opposed to the purposeful learning of the school boy, my paraphrase and example...But this is not true...On the one hand human survival and on the other, human happiness provide us reason to seek knowledge...Far from being without purpose it has the greatest purpose or it would not justify the cruelty and injustice thrives on...
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Mon 28 Dec, 2009 07:55 pm
@Fido,
Fido;115106 wrote:
So he was rich...That is no excuse for him being an esshole...You have to want it, you know, to be an ess... Look at some one like Aristippus... There is a philosopher for the masses...He didn't have to have money to act like it...He was not averse to accepting the spit of a tyrant, or kneeling before him...He had wisdom and the tyrant had money so it was a fair trade...I love the story about him spitting in the face of a rich man because in the man's beautiful house he could find no better place... He left his daughter with the lesson to never put a value on anything she could live without...Plato, sold into slavery by the father, and volunteered as slave to the son, never could free himself from the tyranny of the ideal...Men and mankind were never perfect enough for Plato...It was he that needed the work....At least the age was not completely bare of human beings...

You know, philosophy to those people was luxury built upon slavery and the veins of Attic silver...I will try to find the words of Aristotle in Metaphysics, where he said something like philosophy was enjoyable because it was engaged in for no particular purpose, as opposed to the purposeful learning of the school boy, my paraphrase and example...But this is not true...On the one hand human survival and on the other, human happiness provide us reason to seek knowledge...Far from being without purpose it has the greatest purpose or it would not justify the cruelty and injustice thrives on...


What you say here reminds me somehow of a famous scene in the Orson Well's movie, "The Third Man" where Harry Lime (Orson Wells) is speaking about human happiness and a happy society, and he points to Switzerland, and talks about what a happy and contented country it has been for 500 years. And then he adds, "But what have the Swiss produced in that 500 years? The cuckoo clock."
 
Fido
 
Reply Mon 28 Dec, 2009 10:14 pm
@fast,
Right hand, cockoo clock; left hand, Thermo Nuclear Weapons...This is going to be a tough one all right... Let us consider the production of human happiness, and how much faster we might get there if it were seriously a goal...
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Sun 7 Feb, 2010 02:38 am
@Fido,
Fido;115197 wrote:
. Let us consider the production of human happiness, and how much faster we might get there if it were seriously a goal...


With that I can agree.
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Sun 7 Feb, 2010 03:30 am
@Fido,
Fido;115197 wrote:
Right hand, cockoo clock; left hand, Thermo Nuclear Weapons...This is going to be a tough one all right... Let us consider the production of human happiness, and how much faster we might get there if it were seriously a goal...


Switzerland was famous for it's mercenaries. They were employed by European countries and nobility longing for a country. The Swiss guard of the Vatican is a the last Swiss (Catholic) mercenary army in foreign service.:Glasses:
 
Fido
 
Reply Sun 7 Feb, 2010 12:09 pm
@Pepijn Sweep,
Pepijn Sweep;125682 wrote:
Switzerland was famous for it's mercenaries. They were employed by European countries and nobility longing for a country. The Swiss guard of the Vatican is a the last Swiss (Catholic) mercenary army in foreign service.:Glasses:

Remember this line: Pas l'argent, pas le Swiss...
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Thu 4 Mar, 2010 03:34 am
@fast,
Is all truth unprovable, excepting tautology? But formal logic is just tautology and negation....?
Quote:

4.465 The logical product of a tautology and a proposition says the same
thing as the proposition. This product, therefore, is identical with the
proposition. For it is impossible to alter what is essential to a symbol
without altering its sense.


4.466 What corresponds to a determinate logical combination of signs is
a determinate logical combination of their meanings. It is only to the
uncombined signs that absolutely any combination corresponds. In
other words, propositions that are true for every situation cannot be
combinations of signs at all, since, if they were, only determinate
combinations of objects could correspond to them. (And what is not a
logical combination has no combination of objects corresponding to
it.) Tautology and contradiction are the limiting cases--indeed the
disintegration--of the combination of signs.
 
 

 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 08/08/2020 at 09:49:44