Friedrich Nietzsche
• German philosopher and died in 1900
• Before he was a philosopher, he was a philologist study of words associated with ancient cultures – he was a specialist in ancient Greek culture
• He wrote “Twilight of the Idols”; “On the Geneology of Morals”; “Thus Spake Zarathustra” this is the one where he says God is dead.
• Nietzsche claimed he was on a Campaign Against Morality. The things he was against:
1. Christianity and the moral teaching of Jesus Christ and the sermon on the mount – weak/slave mentality
• He rejected Jesus’ moral teachings and thought they were a sign of weakness (turning the other cheek)
2. Nietzsche rejected Kantianism & the Categorical Imperative – he said we are not logical when it comes to ethics.
3. He also rejected Utilitarianism – “Greatest good for the greatest many” – Nice way of saying majority rules (democracy) – He says this is a bad idea because the masses get to choose what is right or wrong…he’s thinking is what do they know?
• Human dilemma: He says, as humans, we want to do the right thing; however, we don’t know for certain right from wrong. Why are we in this dilemma? He would say it’s because God is dead. THIS IS NOT ATHEISM. He means that people act like God is dead. Why do people act that way? Because God is absent from everyday human life. The absence of God is the theme that runs through Nietzsche’s philosophy. He is saying God may exist, but he’s not here.
• His critique of religion rests on the absence of God.
• Because God is not here to tell us right from wrong & punish wrong doing…I’m all alone when it comes to morality. Nietzsche would say my dilemma only leaves me with 2 choices:
1. I can take somebody else’s word for it (God isn’t here so God has representatives so we need to take their word for it) – (faith)
2. I can make it up myself as I go along
• He says 99.9% of the worlds’ population does #1
• He is going to suppose that the entire Bible is true and he will use it as the best evidence against God.
• He talks about the Old Testament first:
1. Exodus from Egypt – Israelites escape Egypt; The Israelites show up at Mt. Sinai (10 commandments); but when Moses comes back, all the Israelites are partying and worshiping a golden calf – they violated the first 3 commandments and opened up the Earth and swallowed up a third of Israelites.
• Nietzsche says these are story after story after story of God taking an active role in human life – God is the law giver & punishes wrong doing (policeman) so there was no human dilemma because they knew for certain what the right thing was.
• Because of God’s activity, there was no human dilemma; no one had to wonder what was right from wrong…everyone knew.
• Nietzsche said that this all would have been nice. No one would have to wonder what was right or wrong…back then, God would say to read the 10 commandments. Morality was very clear cut.
• Nietzsche would say some time after Jesus died (1st CE), God seemed to have lost interest because it’s not like it was in the Old Testament anymore. And, there is no explanation of God not being there anymore.
• Everything changes after the Old Testament because of Jesus; however the advent of Jesus Christ doesn’t actually change anything.
• God does exist and Im all along or God exists and Im all alone? Which is worst?
• Do you feel like Nietzsche has accurately described the world that we live in?
• Mt. Kilimanjaro in Africa – clouds start to form at the mountaintop and at the stroke of midnight a loud voice boomed and said “I’m back” and said “I am the God of the old testament” & “The ten commandments are my law” – would everybody start behaving themselves? Yes!
• Faith is substance of things hoped for and evidence of things not seen
• Extenstentialist say that this is very empowering and you get to be a real person.
• There are 2 groups of people that do either #1 or #2.
May 4, 2011
Slave Morality
o They get their morals from somebody else (They take somebody else’s word for it) For Nietzsche, you can dress it up as ‘faith’, but ultimately, you are taking somebody’s word for it.
o They are inspired to follow
o They may be people of action, but what distinguishes them is that the things that they do (their behavior) are simply emulating somebody else
o Unoriginal thinkers and simply do what they are told and borrow somebody else’s thoughts
o They may be rebels (might be) but usually go with the flow; they are only being a rebel to emulate somebody else, not originally or for their own reasons.
o Nietzsche says 99.9% of humans fall into this category
o Acquire power through association with master mentality
o Not virtuous
o Odysseus’ shipmates
o Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, Nazis, etc.
Master Morality
o They make morality up themselves
o They are leaders and they inspire others to follow them
o Nietzsche says not only do they inspire, but it is never by fear or intimidation; people simply follow because they want to
o They are people of action; they are doers
o They are also as an original a thinker as possible
o They are also rebels; they usually reject their society that they live in…the society’s morals, laws, values, or traditions.
o .01% of people fall into this category
o Acquires power by being followed
o Virtuous
o Nietzsche Odysseus
o Jay Jesus
Nietzsche has a concept called Will to Power to go along with this.
- Hitler used and changed a lot of this, but Nietzsche wouldn’t have thought highly of Nazis
- This suggested that everyone, all human beings…the most basic human drive…everyone desires power/significance
- Nietzsche says slaves and master get their power differently
- Master mentality acquires power by being followed and having followers who obey every command
- Slave acquire power through association with the master mentality
-
Paradigmatic (best example) Example of MM:
- According to Nietzsche, there was a guy named Odysseus who was a Greek hero
- Iliad – Trojan War – Greeks win b/c Odysseus comes up with idea of Trojan horse; Greeks won the war by deception
- Odysseus was considered a hero because he was the best liar and best at deception
- Odyssey – Follows Trojan War; journey around the Mediterranean; Cyclops who kept sheep – captures Odysseus and his shipmates and eats one everyday – Odysseus tricks Cyclops and hides under the sheep as they go out of the cave – Cyclops gets his eye poked by and Odysseus says his name is ‘nobody’/ Sirens – sing the seductive songs to sailors and Odysseus puts wax in his sailors ears but him so he can be the only one to hear the sirens.
- Odysseus was Master mentality – shipmates follow him
- Odysseus asks at each stop, who’s the king – kills him, beds the queen, and treasure
- According to Nietzsche, Odysseus was the best example – best liar, thief, murderer, cheater, etc.
- Why would Nietzsche call Odysseus virtuous if he lies, cheat, etc… Nietzsche doesn’t think the moral qualities are what make you virtuous, it’s the master mentality qualities that makes you virtuous
Jay Arnold’s #1 Master Mentality of all time:
- Jesus Christ
- He was a leader and inspired people to follow him without threatening them
- He was a doer and person of action; he wasn’t a cross legged wise-man just sitting all day; preaching, healing and walking amongst the people
- He was revising Old Testament law; and he was just downright changing it (original thinker)
- He was a rebel, although he never broke any civil laws, but he broke all religious traditions – he did the exact opposite of what he was supposed to do
- He was virtuous and opposite of Odysseus – he was honest, and did not kill, steal, lie, etc.
- Nietzsche would agree that Jesus belongs on the list.
Let’s continue the list:
Master Mentality List – do their own thinking
- Jesus Christ
- Odysseus
- Buddha
- [Mohammed]
- Zoroasteri (founded Hinduism)
- Joseph Smith (Mormons – Book of Mormon)
- L. Ron Hubbard (Scientology)
- Gandhi
- Dr. King/Malcolm X
- Hitler – he was elected in a free election – didn’t rule by fear/ man of action – speaking, preaching, organization party
- Oprah
- Socrates
Almost (Slave Mentality) – takes someone else’s word for it
- Religious leaders who follow (disciples – St. Paul, Pope) Unoriginal
- Cult leaders because very unoriginal
- Philosophers – original thinkers but they rarely do shit
- Kings, Generals, politicians, dictators – people with power and inspire and people of actions, but they ruled by fear
Nietzsche’s Eternal Recurrence
- If you knew that when you died, you were going to have to live the exact same life over and over again the exact same way, what would you change now?
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Gandhi
British Colonialism
- 1800s (Gandhi born in 1869) British was THE world power (The British Empire)
- You occupy with a military force another country and you deny the native people civil rights and you export goods from that country for profit
- “The Sun never sets on the British Empire” meaning they owned/colonized so much of the world that it was daylight somewhere
- Natives are forced to dress like the British; forced to speak the Queen’s English; raised in British school and given British education including requiring the natives to be Christians The British considered their colonialism a kind of missionary work; going to countries and converting the native people and helping them become more civilized (This is the world Gandhi was born and raised and goes against)
- In India, the British were exporting 3 things: Tea, Textiles, and Salt
Mohandas K. Gandhi
- Mahatma = Great Soul
- Born 1869 into a middle class family
- In 1884 he is married at 15 to a woman named Kasturbai
- Rare philosopher he took his ideas and took them in the world and tried them out
- At this point, his father is dying and a sacred vow is that one family member sits with him so they don’t die alone
- Gandhi takes the vow to sit with his father, but he just got married to Kasturbai so he sneaks away to be with Kasturbai and while he is gone, his father dies and it is a great shame to him because it is a broken vow (basically to God and to his father) in order to satisfy a physical appetite.
- In 1888, Gandhi travels to London to go to Law School (Gandhi did believe that British were good Christians and that this was a type of missionary work)
- When he gets there, he encounters extreme racism and is not allowed to walk on the sidewalks with the white people
• #1 encounter with racism, but it doesn’t change his mind about the British and thinks that its just some people misbehaving in London.
- 1893 – He graduated and traveled to South Africa to practice Law in Johannesburg. He does not go back to India.
• #2 encounter with British racism – he buys a first class tickets to South Africa. He buys a new suit and hat, but when he gets on the train, they gave his ticket to a white person; but he still doesn’t change his mind at this point and still believes the British is doing God’s work
- 1906 – Turning point in Gandhi’s life. Zulu Rebellion takes place in South Africa. The Zulu were a native tribe of Africans outside Johannesburg. Zulu were an exception to the rule – they lived on their ancient tribal lands and still wore their traditional garb, but in 1906 the British decided they wanted the land that the Zulu lived on and put together a military force to remove them from their land. The British required native Africans and visiting Indians, like Gandhi, to fight the Zulu. At this point, Gandhi is already committed personally to non-violence; he is a passivist at this point in his life so he doesn’t want to serve in a violent way, but he feels that it is his duty to serve the British so he serves as an ambulance driver in order to avoid fighting. British show up and annialated the Zulu and killed even the women and children.
• #3 encounter - Gandhi sees all these dying people and is not allowed to pick them up so this is THE moment that Gandhi changed his mind
- He realizes and concludes that Christians would not behave this way
- Gandhi’s view of non-violence
• Main source of influence was Jesus Christ and His moral teachings and his Sermon on the Mount
- Gandhi was not a Christian; he was influenced by JC’s teachings but not a Christian; he did not believe JC was God
- JC said when someone hits you in the face, “you turn the other cheek”
- If someone steals your coat, “you give them your shirt”
- If someone curses you, “bless them”
- If someone persecutes you, “pray for them”
- Theme of non-violence as a solution
- “blessed are the meek” If the Roman soldier asks you to carry their backpack…you have to carry it one mile (Roman Law); but Jesus said, carry it another mile “go the extra mile”.
- Gandhi was Hindu and their Bible is the ‘Baghvad Gita’
- 1906 British also passed the Black Act which said three things: All people of color, meaning anyone who is not white, must
1. Observe curfew
2. They must have all paper identification on them at all times (Birth Certificate, ID Cards, etc)
3. A person of color may be detained by the police without probable cause meaning you can be stopped by the color of your skin
- Gandhi organizes a peaceful protest of the Black Act and basically, they all (1500 people) sat down outside of the courthouse in Johannesburg without their paperwork; however, it doesn’t work, the British police and military show up and beat the crap out of everyone there and the British use violence and jail all of them, including Gandhi.
- This is Gandhi’s first, but not last, stay in jail.
- By his 70s, he spends 1/3rd of his life in jail (just like Dr. King)
- This causes a backlash against colored people.
- Gandhi is confused the protest failed and he asked himself, why did it fail? His thinking is God wants me to never use violence so in obedience to God, and in an act of faith, I peacefully protested and because I obeyed God, I expected God to bless me, and to reward me by freeing us from British oppression This question develops Gandhi’s philosophy and his answer is his philosophy
- Gandhi concludes that he left out an important part of the equation He comes up with 2 concepts:
1. Swaraj + Satyagraha = Obedience to God
- He thinks during the Black Act, he had Swaraj, but not Satyagraha
- Swaraj means independence and self-control He says this means having the self-control to not fight back when someone physically assaults and hurts you (“turn the other cheek”) – BUT, you have to do this in obedience to God.
• Swaraj also means freedom or self-control from physical appetites by making a vow (Goes back to the incident with his father) in obedience to God. One vow Gandhi makes is fasting.
• Gandhi thinks he got the Swaraj part right at the protest
- Satyagraha means “soul-force of love” love thy neighbor as thyself
• Love for the oppressor He says it is not enough to restrain from fighting back, but you must also love your oppressor while they are doing it. (must be genuine because God knows your heart)
• Gandhi thinks if you obey God with Swaraj and Satyagraha (must have both – an act of faith), then God will change the heart of your oppressor, show them the error of their ways, and they will stop oppressing you.
• Basically God will free you from your oppressors
- God works a miracle by an act of faith (having both Swaraj and Satyagraha) This is totally up to God and him changing the situation.
- He publishes a book in 1909 and he calls it, “Hind Swaraj” = (Indian Independence) and he outlines this philosophy
- Civil disobedience and Swaraj is when you peacefully break the law
1. Ex: peaceful protest of the Black Act, however…
2. S&S is the peaceful breaking of laws plus love for the oppressor (This is the difference between Civil Disobedience and Swaraj)
- 1915 Gandhi returns to India, and he wants to try his philosophy. He never accomplished anything in South Africa – He had been gone for 27 years to go back and try the philosophy
- In 1915, he decides to try Swaraj on his own people; He says to his people that “We Indians are hypocrites. We complain about the British oppressing us, when we oppress our own people. Why would we expect God to free us from the British, while we are disobeying God by oppressing our own.”
- In India at this time, there is a Caste System. This is a 4000yr old religious tradition sanctioned by ‘Gita’; it was a social hierarchy, not based on race, but rather birth & family
1. Brahman
2. --
3. --
4. Untouchables – spiritually unclean; in the site of the gods, they were sinful and couldn’t get rid of their sins; no one else was allowed to touch them – The only job available to the untouchables was to carry out the chamber pots from people’s houses
- Gandhi says to get rid of the Caste System – This is an example of Swaraj – Gandhi says we need to be able to rule ourselves, which includes doing the right thing, if we want to be free from the British; and the only way we can show God this is by getting rid of the Caste System.
- Gandhi takes out his own chamber pots; Kasurbai refuses – Brahmans also hated this and Gandhi
- In 1915, he also takes a vow of celibacy – he does this because he is taking a vow
April 27, 2011
- Gandhi almost single handedly does away with the Caste System
- 1919 Amritsar Massacre takes place – It was a small town in India; the British military & police killed peaceful Indian protestors, but they went a little crazy and overboard and killed innocent bystanders as well.
- In order to cover up what they did, the British media portrayed the Indians as a violent mob who were loose on the streets (untrue) – British manipulated the media
- Because of this massacre, Gandhi assumes leadership of the Indian National Congress which didn’t have any real power because the British was still in rule. It was a group dedicated towards independence.
- He decided to put into practice his double edged sword = satyagraha + swaraj
- So…at the textile factories – he told the workers go to work 6 days a week and do exactly as you are told; however,
1. 1 day a week, show up to the factory, sit down in a big circle around the factory;
2. Wear native clothing only on that day, other days you wear British clothing
3. Sing hymns in praise to God and pray out loud for the British
4. Bring a spinning wheel and make your own clothes
- There is a theme running through Gandhi’s philosophy: How did Indians live before the British?
- You can see this theme through his method at the textile factories Direct attack on colonialism (natives can’t dress in their clothing, etc)
- Now, the British military show up and beat the shit out of the Indians. Gandhi says, don’t fight back and love them (satyagraha + swaraj) British do not look like good Christians anymore
- Now, the tea industry (British said you must observe High Tea which meant you had to buy your tea from the British Tea factories and drink it 3 times a day)
1. Gandhi orders everyone to stop drinking tea in one day This one day almost destroys the industry
- Now, British Trains They covered India with trains, and they said that you aren’t allowed to walk from town to town and you have to buy a ticket
1. Walk everywhere you go
2. Don’t ride the trains
3. Gandhi walked 70-80 miles a day
4. The completely shuts down and destroys the British train industry overnight
- He was trying to send the British a message
- Britain is crippling and it takes 3 short years (1922) The British had enough and called Gandhi and said they were ready to talk and give India its Independence.
- It looks like the British India is being brought to its knees while Gandhi walks to meet them
- “Crime” of Chauri Chaura They were holding a peaceful textile protest and British show up and beat the Indians, but they don’t have swaraj and they fight back & kill all of the British soldiers & drag the bodies into the town of Chauri Chaura & then they kill all of the police officers who were native Indians. They take all the bodies and put them in the police station and set the place on fire and dance throughout the night.
- Now the British have the sympathy of the world – Gandhi was pissed
- In the beginning, he told his people, “If you cannot govern yourselves (swaraj), then you don’t deserve to be free from the British”
- Gandhi calls the British and says, “It’s off…we don’t want independence & we don’t deserve it”. He tells the people to go back and do what you were doing…British industry comes up again.
- Gandhi punished everyone because of how one town behaved…people were pissed.
- Gandhi made his people wait 8 years 1930 – Gandhi reinstates and starts protest up again – textile, tea and trains.
- He calls the world press and tells them we’re going to do it again.
- This time, he does something different – He stages the Salt March to the Sea This will be the last export Britain has
1. In British Law, it was against the law in India to make your own salt and you had to buy it from the British
2. Gandhi asked once again, how did we get salt before the British got here?
3. He announces to the world press & British that he will walk the length of India and when he gets to the ocean, he will make his own salt in defiance to the British Law
4. It takes him about 8 weeks and he makes his own salt
5. Goes to villages and tells people to join him….there are thousands that join him
6. He makes it to the sea & bends over and gets some salt from the seaweed and raises the salt and says “India is free”
7. British didn’t show up
8. August 15, 1947 India gets its Independence
- Gandhi never took the protest to the extreme and it took 17 years.
- The British leave willingly without a shot fired (besides Chauri Chaura)
Now, people began to fight over who was going to run India
- It was the Muslims vs. Hindus; civil war – it was a mass violence across the country
- Gandhi has a solution – He uses swaraj again his own people
1. He announces to the world and to India his #1 fast to end Muslim vs. Hindu violence “I’m not going to eat until you stop killing each other”
2. “If you don’t stop killing each other, you will kill me”
3. He takes a vow to God and he stops eating
- They Muslims and Hindus try to stop fighting and Gandhi gets 4 weeks into his fast and is bedridden
- 5 weeks into the fast he starts losing consciousness – but at this time, they stop fighting
- It works! They give him some lemon juice and he comes back
- He praises God that he changed the Muslims and Hindus heart
- 4 mos. later, they start fighting again
1. #2 fast – Won’t stop eating until they stop fighting
2. 4 weeks – bedridden
3. 5 weeks lost consciousness
4. 6 weeks – slips into a coma – They stop and it works this time.
5. They form a conference between the Muslims and Hindus and divide the country into provinces
6. Kasturbai steps up and gives Gandhi some beef broth & he comes out of his coma
- He praises God & Muslims and Hindus maintain their conference
- Jan. 1948 – Gandhi takes his morning walk to Deli for prayer and a man shoots him 8 shots in the chest – he is assassinated by one of his own people; a young Hindu Indian nationalist because the young man wanted the Hindus to be in control of the country
- 3 mos. later, the Muslims and Hindus still fight and are still fighting today.
- Gandhi’s family asked that the young man be let go with no punishment at all and to be forgiven.
- They hung him 3 days later.
- World War II was going on during this time; and was asked what should we do about Hitler? – forgive them, love them, and lay down your weapons and don’t fight.
- Winston Churchill would not meet with Gandhi during WWII
- Gandhi did meet with Mussolini he walked down a long hallway with torches & Mussolini sat there and stared at Gandhi across a desk for an hour.
What reasons besides God did the British leave?
- No longer profitable – used up resources
- Treaty of Versailles – hypocrites
- Pressure by the media – the whole world knew what the British were really doing
- Ultimately, Gandhi would say it was God working a miracle
- 1800s (Gandhi born in 1869) British was THE world power (The British Empire)
- You occupy with a military force another country and you deny the native people civil rights and you export goods from that country for profit
- “The Sun never sets on the British Empire” meaning they owned/colonized so much of the world that it was daylight somewhere
- Natives are forced to dress like the British; forced to speak the Queen’s English; raised in British school and given British education including requiring the natives to be Christians The British considered their colonialism a kind of missionary work; going to countries and converting the native people and helping them become more civilized (This is the world Gandhi was born and raised and goes against)
- In India, the British were exporting 3 things: Tea, Textiles, and Salt
Mohandas K. Gandhi
- Mahatma = Great Soul
- Born 1869 into a middle class family
- In 1884 he is married at 15 to a woman named Kasturbai
- Rare philosopher he took his ideas and took them in the world and tried them out
- At this point, his father is dying and a sacred vow is that one family member sits with him so they don’t die alone
- Gandhi takes the vow to sit with his father, but he just got married to Kasturbai so he sneaks away to be with Kasturbai and while he is gone, his father dies and it is a great shame to him because it is a broken vow (basically to God and to his father) in order to satisfy a physical appetite.
- In 1888, Gandhi travels to London to go to Law School (Gandhi did believe that British were good Christians and that this was a type of missionary work)
- When he gets there, he encounters extreme racism and is not allowed to walk on the sidewalks with the white people
• #1 encounter with racism, but it doesn’t change his mind about the British and thinks that its just some people misbehaving in London.
- 1893 – He graduated and traveled to South Africa to practice Law in Johannesburg. He does not go back to India.
• #2 encounter with British racism – he buys a first class tickets to South Africa. He buys a new suit and hat, but when he gets on the train, they gave his ticket to a white person; but he still doesn’t change his mind at this point and still believes the British is doing God’s work
- 1906 – Turning point in Gandhi’s life. Zulu Rebellion takes place in South Africa. The Zulu were a native tribe of Africans outside Johannesburg. Zulu were an exception to the rule – they lived on their ancient tribal lands and still wore their traditional garb, but in 1906 the British decided they wanted the land that the Zulu lived on and put together a military force to remove them from their land. The British required native Africans and visiting Indians, like Gandhi, to fight the Zulu. At this point, Gandhi is already committed personally to non-violence; he is a passivist at this point in his life so he doesn’t want to serve in a violent way, but he feels that it is his duty to serve the British so he serves as an ambulance driver in order to avoid fighting. British show up and annialated the Zulu and killed even the women and children.
• #3 encounter - Gandhi sees all these dying people and is not allowed to pick them up so this is THE moment that Gandhi changed his mind
- He realizes and concludes that Christians would not behave this way
- Gandhi’s view of non-violence
• Main source of influence was Jesus Christ and His moral teachings and his Sermon on the Mount
- Gandhi was not a Christian; he was influenced by JC’s teachings but not a Christian; he did not believe JC was God
- JC said when someone hits you in the face, “you turn the other cheek”
- If someone steals your coat, “you give them your shirt”
- If someone curses you, “bless them”
- If someone persecutes you, “pray for them”
- Theme of non-violence as a solution
- “blessed are the meek” If the Roman soldier asks you to carry their backpack…you have to carry it one mile (Roman Law); but Jesus said, carry it another mile “go the extra mile”.
- Gandhi was Hindu and their Bible is the ‘Baghvad Gita’
- 1906 British also passed the Black Act which said three things: All people of color, meaning anyone who is not white, must
1. Observe curfew
2. They must have all paper identification on them at all times (Birth Certificate, ID Cards, etc)
3. A person of color may be detained by the police without probable cause meaning you can be stopped by the color of your skin
- Gandhi organizes a peaceful protest of the Black Act and basically, they all (1500 people) sat down outside of the courthouse in Johannesburg without their paperwork; however, it doesn’t work, the British police and military show up and beat the crap out of everyone there and the British use violence and jail all of them, including Gandhi.
- This is Gandhi’s first, but not last, stay in jail.
- By his 70s, he spends 1/3rd of his life in jail (just like Dr. King)
- This causes a backlash against colored people.
- Gandhi is confused the protest failed and he asked himself, why did it fail? His thinking is God wants me to never use violence so in obedience to God, and in an act of faith, I peacefully protested and because I obeyed God, I expected God to bless me, and to reward me by freeing us from British oppression This question develops Gandhi’s philosophy and his answer is his philosophy
- Gandhi concludes that he left out an important part of the equation He comes up with 2 concepts:
1. Swaraj + Satyagraha = Obedience to God
- He thinks during the Black Act, he had Swaraj, but not Satyagraha
- Swaraj means independence and self-control He says this means having the self-control to not fight back when someone physically assaults and hurts you (“turn the other cheek”) – BUT, you have to do this in obedience to God.
• Swaraj also means freedom or self-control from physical appetites by making a vow (Goes back to the incident with his father) in obedience to God. One vow Gandhi makes is fasting.
• Gandhi thinks he got the Swaraj part right at the protest
- Satyagraha means “soul-force of love” love thy neighbor as thyself
• Love for the oppressor He says it is not enough to restrain from fighting back, but you must also love your oppressor while they are doing it. (must be genuine because God knows your heart)
• Gandhi thinks if you obey God with Swaraj and Satyagraha (must have both – an act of faith), then God will change the heart of your oppressor, show them the error of their ways, and they will stop oppressing you.
• Basically God will free you from your oppressors
- God works a miracle by an act of faith (having both Swaraj and Satyagraha) This is totally up to God and him changing the situation.
- He publishes a book in 1909 and he calls it, “Hind Swaraj” = (Indian Independence) and he outlines this philosophy
- Civil disobedience and Swaraj is when you peacefully break the law
1. Ex: peaceful protest of the Black Act, however…
2. S&S is the peaceful breaking of laws plus love for the oppressor (This is the difference between Civil Disobedience and Swaraj)
- 1915 Gandhi returns to India, and he wants to try his philosophy. He never accomplished anything in South Africa – He had been gone for 27 years to go back and try the philosophy
- In 1915, he decides to try Swaraj on his own people; He says to his people that “We Indians are hypocrites. We complain about the British oppressing us, when we oppress our own people. Why would we expect God to free us from the British, while we are disobeying God by oppressing our own.”
- In India at this time, there is a Caste System. This is a 4000yr old religious tradition sanctioned by ‘Gita’; it was a social hierarchy, not based on race, but rather birth & family
1. Brahman
2. --
3. --
4. Untouchables – spiritually unclean; in the site of the gods, they were sinful and couldn’t get rid of their sins; no one else was allowed to touch them – The only job available to the untouchables was to carry out the chamber pots from people’s houses
- Gandhi says to get rid of the Caste System – This is an example of Swaraj – Gandhi says we need to be able to rule ourselves, which includes doing the right thing, if we want to be free from the British; and the only way we can show God this is by getting rid of the Caste System.
- Gandhi takes out his own chamber pots; Kasurbai refuses – Brahmans also hated this and Gandhi
- In 1915, he also takes a vow of celibacy – he does this because he is taking a vow
April 27, 2011
- Gandhi almost single handedly does away with the Caste System
- 1919 Amritsar Massacre takes place – It was a small town in India; the British military & police killed peaceful Indian protestors, but they went a little crazy and overboard and killed innocent bystanders as well.
- In order to cover up what they did, the British media portrayed the Indians as a violent mob who were loose on the streets (untrue) – British manipulated the media
- Because of this massacre, Gandhi assumes leadership of the Indian National Congress which didn’t have any real power because the British was still in rule. It was a group dedicated towards independence.
- He decided to put into practice his double edged sword = satyagraha + swaraj
- So…at the textile factories – he told the workers go to work 6 days a week and do exactly as you are told; however,
1. 1 day a week, show up to the factory, sit down in a big circle around the factory;
2. Wear native clothing only on that day, other days you wear British clothing
3. Sing hymns in praise to God and pray out loud for the British
4. Bring a spinning wheel and make your own clothes
- There is a theme running through Gandhi’s philosophy: How did Indians live before the British?
- You can see this theme through his method at the textile factories Direct attack on colonialism (natives can’t dress in their clothing, etc)
- Now, the British military show up and beat the shit out of the Indians. Gandhi says, don’t fight back and love them (satyagraha + swaraj) British do not look like good Christians anymore
- Now, the tea industry (British said you must observe High Tea which meant you had to buy your tea from the British Tea factories and drink it 3 times a day)
1. Gandhi orders everyone to stop drinking tea in one day This one day almost destroys the industry
- Now, British Trains They covered India with trains, and they said that you aren’t allowed to walk from town to town and you have to buy a ticket
1. Walk everywhere you go
2. Don’t ride the trains
3. Gandhi walked 70-80 miles a day
4. The completely shuts down and destroys the British train industry overnight
- He was trying to send the British a message
- Britain is crippling and it takes 3 short years (1922) The British had enough and called Gandhi and said they were ready to talk and give India its Independence.
- It looks like the British India is being brought to its knees while Gandhi walks to meet them
- “Crime” of Chauri Chaura They were holding a peaceful textile protest and British show up and beat the Indians, but they don’t have swaraj and they fight back & kill all of the British soldiers & drag the bodies into the town of Chauri Chaura & then they kill all of the police officers who were native Indians. They take all the bodies and put them in the police station and set the place on fire and dance throughout the night.
- Now the British have the sympathy of the world – Gandhi was pissed
- In the beginning, he told his people, “If you cannot govern yourselves (swaraj), then you don’t deserve to be free from the British”
- Gandhi calls the British and says, “It’s off…we don’t want independence & we don’t deserve it”. He tells the people to go back and do what you were doing…British industry comes up again.
- Gandhi punished everyone because of how one town behaved…people were pissed.
- Gandhi made his people wait 8 years 1930 – Gandhi reinstates and starts protest up again – textile, tea and trains.
- He calls the world press and tells them we’re going to do it again.
- This time, he does something different – He stages the Salt March to the Sea This will be the last export Britain has
1. In British Law, it was against the law in India to make your own salt and you had to buy it from the British
2. Gandhi asked once again, how did we get salt before the British got here?
3. He announces to the world press & British that he will walk the length of India and when he gets to the ocean, he will make his own salt in defiance to the British Law
4. It takes him about 8 weeks and he makes his own salt
5. Goes to villages and tells people to join him….there are thousands that join him
6. He makes it to the sea & bends over and gets some salt from the seaweed and raises the salt and says “India is free”
7. British didn’t show up
8. August 15, 1947 India gets its Independence
- Gandhi never took the protest to the extreme and it took 17 years.
- The British leave willingly without a shot fired (besides Chauri Chaura)
Now, people began to fight over who was going to run India
- It was the Muslims vs. Hindus; civil war – it was a mass violence across the country
- Gandhi has a solution – He uses swaraj again his own people
1. He announces to the world and to India his #1 fast to end Muslim vs. Hindu violence “I’m not going to eat until you stop killing each other”
2. “If you don’t stop killing each other, you will kill me”
3. He takes a vow to God and he stops eating
- They Muslims and Hindus try to stop fighting and Gandhi gets 4 weeks into his fast and is bedridden
- 5 weeks into the fast he starts losing consciousness – but at this time, they stop fighting
- It works! They give him some lemon juice and he comes back
- He praises God that he changed the Muslims and Hindus heart
- 4 mos. later, they start fighting again
1. #2 fast – Won’t stop eating until they stop fighting
2. 4 weeks – bedridden
3. 5 weeks lost consciousness
4. 6 weeks – slips into a coma – They stop and it works this time.
5. They form a conference between the Muslims and Hindus and divide the country into provinces
6. Kasturbai steps up and gives Gandhi some beef broth & he comes out of his coma
- He praises God & Muslims and Hindus maintain their conference
- Jan. 1948 – Gandhi takes his morning walk to Deli for prayer and a man shoots him 8 shots in the chest – he is assassinated by one of his own people; a young Hindu Indian nationalist because the young man wanted the Hindus to be in control of the country
- 3 mos. later, the Muslims and Hindus still fight and are still fighting today.
- Gandhi’s family asked that the young man be let go with no punishment at all and to be forgiven.
- They hung him 3 days later.
- World War II was going on during this time; and was asked what should we do about Hitler? – forgive them, love them, and lay down your weapons and don’t fight.
- Winston Churchill would not meet with Gandhi during WWII
- Gandhi did meet with Mussolini he walked down a long hallway with torches & Mussolini sat there and stared at Gandhi across a desk for an hour.
What reasons besides God did the British leave?
- No longer profitable – used up resources
- Treaty of Versailles – hypocrites
- Pressure by the media – the whole world knew what the British were really doing
- Ultimately, Gandhi would say it was God working a miracle
Mary Wollstonecraft
Mary Wollstonecraft
- Earliest feminist writer
- 1700s Enlightenment thinker prized human rationality/logic as a means for leading people to behave more ethically
o During the enlightenment, people who wrote were enlightenment thinkers: they thought that if you could offer someone a rational argument for why should do something, it would lead them to do the right or ethical thing.
- Kant, a contemporary, Categorical Imperative logic/rationality leads to ethical behavior, and yet, he was a fierce mysonganist – a person who believes women are inherently/naturally inferior to men (physically, spiritually, emotionally, etc.) very irrational because form of prejudice.
- Ku Klux Klan wouldn’t be able to change their minds…
- Mary thought she could change Kant’s mind...not happening
- Some mysonganist and enlightenment thinkers
- Rousseau mysonganist worse than Kant
- David Hume public atheist; he was never allowed to teach anywhere because he was an atheist.
- Kant was a theist and he and Hume disagreed about EVERYTHING except that women were inferior
- John Locke
The plight of women in the 1700s, particularly in Victorian England
• Morals were very, very strict.
• There were only 3 jobs available to women (no single life available to women)
1. Nanny lives with rich family and schools children Mary Poppins) This was a temporary job until marriage. They lived with their parents, then family, then husband they were not allowed to live on their own; no one would rent to them
2. Schoolteacher seen as a temporary position; and could only teach boys up till about 2nd or 3rd grade, and they could teach girls at all ages.
3. Prostitute only ‘career’ available; not allowed to be married or attend social events.. You could rent an apartment…this was the only exception. There was no prophylactic birth control so many STDs and births. (Ancient Greece and Rome had condoms) – They stuffed pebbles in their vagina to prevent deep penetration...ouch!
• No private property ownership or income for women. If you were a teacher/nanny, the father or husband would take wages. If a wife inherits $1 mill, the husband gets the money.
• No voting
• No laws to prosecute domestic violence/marital rape. Both were legal.
• Arranged marriages/ no dating/ dowry (bride price If I’m a wealthy father, I will pay a man a large amount of money for a man to marry my daughter)
Mary Wollstonecraft’s life
- Oldest of 3 sisters
- Father was very wealthy, but developed a gambling problem and spent all of the dowry at the casino
- By the time Mary become marrying age, there is no dowry, so not an attractive prospect for a husband
- She becomes a nanny and teaches children; she disagrees with the mother of the family and stops being the nanny
- She then becomes a school teacher; she is very unhappy with the state of girls education and doesn’t believe they are being taught what they should/need to be taught.
- She starts her own school and she writes her own curriculum/textbooks for the school in hopes of creating a school that provided better education for girls.
- Nobody wants to send their kids to a school started by a woman so it quickly shuts down
- Now, she teaches herself German, Spanish, and French and she travels Europe alone
- She starts to write travel books which are very successful and become semi-famous like a celebrity based on the books
- She also translates foreign books into English for money for the publishers
- She is living on her own with an independent income – one of the only women to do this – she gets away with this because she is traveling
- She lives a “Bohemian” lifestyle freethinker; not living in conformity/accordance with the morals of society
- Cohabitation – she lived with people while she wasn’t married to them – this was illegal and morally frowned upon During this time, she had a child out of wedlock and they actually put the word ‘bastard’ on the birth certificate.
- She had several ménage trois relationships A sexual relationship between 3 people She would move in with a married couple who were also semi-famous – all this behavior caused tabloids to go crazy because of the scandals.
Mary Wollstonecraft’s Overarching Argument in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
P1: If women are education, that is, their natural reason is cultivated; then, they will make better wives, mothers and citizens
P2: If women are better wives, mothers, and citizens, then men will be better husbands, fathers and citizens
P3: If men and women are better citizens, then society as a whole will benefit
/Therefore, women should be educated, that is, their natural reason should be cultivated.
o This book was written to men for men to read, not to women.
o It was a rational appeal to change men’s minds She is asking nicely.
o There is no demand, ever, by Mary. (There is no demand even for rights she deserves.)
o She never asks for legal equality She never asks for the right to vote, own property, etc
o She appeals for a better education for women Her entire argument is focused on getting a better education for women
o She defines education: to cultivate their natural reason; meaning, teach them to think for themselves This will create independence and this will lead to legal equality (She sees it as a means (education) to an end (legal equality))
o Modern Feminists are very critical of Mary; they don’t like her at all even though she is pretty much the earliest feminist philosopher.
They say that Mary should not appeal or ask nicely for rights. – They say she should demand them
• Dr. King made a moral appeal to white America and it was always peaceful…never a demand. Malcolm X said no…they are OUR rights, so he used violence.
Reverse Psychology The argument is saying that men will benefit first; feminists would say who cares if it benefits or makes men happy.
April 20, 2011
Minor Argument #1 – Childlike vs. Sex Object
Childlike:
Women were viewed as childlike and sex objects; Mary said these two views are contradictory…you cannot view something as a child and yet equating them with sexuality.
- Women viewed as naïve, gullible & easily led astray by an inability to control appetites & desires because of pure nature
- Solution: Keep a close eye on your daughter or wife, women must be looked after like children, protected from themselves
o This attitude was due to John Milton
- John Milton “Paradise Lost” book length poem about Satan’s fall from Heaven & Garden of Eden – 2 books used to teach children to read
o Paradise Lost (PL)
1. John portrays Eve as being very naïve, gullible and easily led astray because she ate the forbidden fruit…they realize that they are naked after they eat the fruit. God curses the 3 people involved in eating the fruit, Satan, Adam & Eve
o King James Bible (KJB)
- Eve (/ all women) responsible for sin in the world because she was childlike & led astray by Satan
- God’s Curse to 3 involved
1. Satan, crawl on your belly
2. Adam, eat by sweat of your brow (you will have to work)
3. Eve, pain in childbearing AND be submissive to your husband (husband will be master)
PG. 19 From PL
“To whom thus Eve w/ perfect beauty adorned
Eve is talking here My author & disposer, what thou bidst?
Unargued, I obey, so God ordains do whatever your husband says bc that is what God says
God is thy law, thou mine”
- Created hierarchy (that kids grow up believing)
o God
o Man
o Woman
o Kids
o Dog
Sex object:
- Prevailing image of women as promiscuous liars Women want sex all the time, no self-control because of their own physical appetites; they are naturally good at lying.
- Solution: Keep your daughter and/or your wife under lock and key (SAME SOLN FOR CHILDLIKE)
- Rousseau: French philosopher and novelist & he was very popular (like Stephen Kind of Europe)
o Wrote a book called ‘Camile’ All of his books portrayed women as promiscuous liars
o These books were read by a mass audience who did not have tv, movies, or radio
o Young girls were raised hearing these books and thinking the image of women were promiscuous liars
o He is completely unapologetic towards women:
o PG 25 Rousseau “…a woman should never for a moment feel herself independent; she should be governed by fear to control her natural cunning (deceiving): She should be made a coquettish (flirty or a China doll made of thin porcelain only for display) slave (possession) in order to render her a more alluring object of desire, a sweeter companion to man, whenever he chooses to relax himself”
***Mary feels the two views of woman as childlike & sex objects are contradictory and they can’t both be true so therefore it’s irrational. Remember, she is an Enlightenment thinker so rationality is the most important thing. ***
Minor Argument #2 – Women’s Education (PG 26)
- Rousseau “But Rousseau…the whole point of female education is to render them pleasing” (It is not to teach them to think for themselves or to cultivate natural reason)
- Girls get a 4th grade education so they are taught basic arithmetic, grammar, history, but beyond the 4th grade, women are taught all throughout high school home economics, fashion, manners, etc.
- Mary also calls out Dr. Gregory; he wrote a textbook called “A Legacy to my Daughters”
o PG 27 – Dr. Gregory “The worthy Dr. Gregory…”
o She says he writes “cultivate a fondness for dress, because a fondness for dress is what comes natural to them” Basically, we are going to teach them to appreciate dress and jewelry because that is what come natural to them
o This is a “Natural Fallacy” The idea that was usually
1. Stereotypes are claimed to be true not because of society, culture, education, or upbringing, but rather because it is natural.
o Mary points out that most of the time, human behavior (male/female) is the result of society, culture, education, or upbringing…NOT NATURE.
o For example - Women were never given the opportunity to learn science so men were better at it
- Social constraints
o Men claimed that girls were naturally more sickly than boys because more girls died than boys
1. Mary says that girls were not allowed to play outside because it was seen as un-lady like and boys got fresh air, sunshine, climb trees, exercise, etc.
2. Corset It would push the diaphragm in and so they couldn’t take a full breath in so if they gasped due to bad news, they would fall over and faint This was seen as a physical weakness
Birth Control is the #1 event in history that has empowered women. It gives the choice to the woman.
Minor Argument #3 – “Friendship or Indifference inevitably follows love”
- Mary says it is the course of Nature that the honeymoon be over (the honeymoon will end)
- When this happens, 1 of 2 things will happen: (remember she is writing this to men)
1. HAPPY Your wife becomes your friend Only if she is your peer (meaning equal) & she will only be your peer if she is educated otherwise she is childlike… OR
2. UNHAPPY Your wife becomes like another kid in the house (just another mouth to feed and someone who is dependent on you) She is childlike and you will resent her
- This is another appeal to men.
- She thinks that men want wives to be their friends…is this true?
How Mary died
• She settled down and finally married a philosopher
• Had a daughter - Marry Shelly (Frankenstein)
• They didn’t get all of the placenta after birth and became infected
• 2 weeks of excruciating pain after giving birth after infection
• Her husband the philosopher knew about her life and told all the sex stuff she did and it became an overnight bestseller in Europe
• Unfortunately, Kant, Rousseau, etc. – she became a cautionary tale and held the book up and said this is what happens when you give a woman an education.
• There was a backlash against feminism and set it back 100 yrs.
- Earliest feminist writer
- 1700s Enlightenment thinker prized human rationality/logic as a means for leading people to behave more ethically
o During the enlightenment, people who wrote were enlightenment thinkers: they thought that if you could offer someone a rational argument for why should do something, it would lead them to do the right or ethical thing.
- Kant, a contemporary, Categorical Imperative logic/rationality leads to ethical behavior, and yet, he was a fierce mysonganist – a person who believes women are inherently/naturally inferior to men (physically, spiritually, emotionally, etc.) very irrational because form of prejudice.
- Ku Klux Klan wouldn’t be able to change their minds…
- Mary thought she could change Kant’s mind...not happening
- Some mysonganist and enlightenment thinkers
- Rousseau mysonganist worse than Kant
- David Hume public atheist; he was never allowed to teach anywhere because he was an atheist.
- Kant was a theist and he and Hume disagreed about EVERYTHING except that women were inferior
- John Locke
The plight of women in the 1700s, particularly in Victorian England
• Morals were very, very strict.
• There were only 3 jobs available to women (no single life available to women)
1. Nanny lives with rich family and schools children Mary Poppins) This was a temporary job until marriage. They lived with their parents, then family, then husband they were not allowed to live on their own; no one would rent to them
2. Schoolteacher seen as a temporary position; and could only teach boys up till about 2nd or 3rd grade, and they could teach girls at all ages.
3. Prostitute only ‘career’ available; not allowed to be married or attend social events.. You could rent an apartment…this was the only exception. There was no prophylactic birth control so many STDs and births. (Ancient Greece and Rome had condoms) – They stuffed pebbles in their vagina to prevent deep penetration...ouch!
• No private property ownership or income for women. If you were a teacher/nanny, the father or husband would take wages. If a wife inherits $1 mill, the husband gets the money.
• No voting
• No laws to prosecute domestic violence/marital rape. Both were legal.
• Arranged marriages/ no dating/ dowry (bride price If I’m a wealthy father, I will pay a man a large amount of money for a man to marry my daughter)
Mary Wollstonecraft’s life
- Oldest of 3 sisters
- Father was very wealthy, but developed a gambling problem and spent all of the dowry at the casino
- By the time Mary become marrying age, there is no dowry, so not an attractive prospect for a husband
- She becomes a nanny and teaches children; she disagrees with the mother of the family and stops being the nanny
- She then becomes a school teacher; she is very unhappy with the state of girls education and doesn’t believe they are being taught what they should/need to be taught.
- She starts her own school and she writes her own curriculum/textbooks for the school in hopes of creating a school that provided better education for girls.
- Nobody wants to send their kids to a school started by a woman so it quickly shuts down
- Now, she teaches herself German, Spanish, and French and she travels Europe alone
- She starts to write travel books which are very successful and become semi-famous like a celebrity based on the books
- She also translates foreign books into English for money for the publishers
- She is living on her own with an independent income – one of the only women to do this – she gets away with this because she is traveling
- She lives a “Bohemian” lifestyle freethinker; not living in conformity/accordance with the morals of society
- Cohabitation – she lived with people while she wasn’t married to them – this was illegal and morally frowned upon During this time, she had a child out of wedlock and they actually put the word ‘bastard’ on the birth certificate.
- She had several ménage trois relationships A sexual relationship between 3 people She would move in with a married couple who were also semi-famous – all this behavior caused tabloids to go crazy because of the scandals.
Mary Wollstonecraft’s Overarching Argument in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
P1: If women are education, that is, their natural reason is cultivated; then, they will make better wives, mothers and citizens
P2: If women are better wives, mothers, and citizens, then men will be better husbands, fathers and citizens
P3: If men and women are better citizens, then society as a whole will benefit
/Therefore, women should be educated, that is, their natural reason should be cultivated.
o This book was written to men for men to read, not to women.
o It was a rational appeal to change men’s minds She is asking nicely.
o There is no demand, ever, by Mary. (There is no demand even for rights she deserves.)
o She never asks for legal equality She never asks for the right to vote, own property, etc
o She appeals for a better education for women Her entire argument is focused on getting a better education for women
o She defines education: to cultivate their natural reason; meaning, teach them to think for themselves This will create independence and this will lead to legal equality (She sees it as a means (education) to an end (legal equality))
o Modern Feminists are very critical of Mary; they don’t like her at all even though she is pretty much the earliest feminist philosopher.
They say that Mary should not appeal or ask nicely for rights. – They say she should demand them
• Dr. King made a moral appeal to white America and it was always peaceful…never a demand. Malcolm X said no…they are OUR rights, so he used violence.
Reverse Psychology The argument is saying that men will benefit first; feminists would say who cares if it benefits or makes men happy.
April 20, 2011
Minor Argument #1 – Childlike vs. Sex Object
Childlike:
Women were viewed as childlike and sex objects; Mary said these two views are contradictory…you cannot view something as a child and yet equating them with sexuality.
- Women viewed as naïve, gullible & easily led astray by an inability to control appetites & desires because of pure nature
- Solution: Keep a close eye on your daughter or wife, women must be looked after like children, protected from themselves
o This attitude was due to John Milton
- John Milton “Paradise Lost” book length poem about Satan’s fall from Heaven & Garden of Eden – 2 books used to teach children to read
o Paradise Lost (PL)
1. John portrays Eve as being very naïve, gullible and easily led astray because she ate the forbidden fruit…they realize that they are naked after they eat the fruit. God curses the 3 people involved in eating the fruit, Satan, Adam & Eve
o King James Bible (KJB)
- Eve (/ all women) responsible for sin in the world because she was childlike & led astray by Satan
- God’s Curse to 3 involved
1. Satan, crawl on your belly
2. Adam, eat by sweat of your brow (you will have to work)
3. Eve, pain in childbearing AND be submissive to your husband (husband will be master)
PG. 19 From PL
“To whom thus Eve w/ perfect beauty adorned
Eve is talking here My author & disposer, what thou bidst?
Unargued, I obey, so God ordains do whatever your husband says bc that is what God says
God is thy law, thou mine”
- Created hierarchy (that kids grow up believing)
o God
o Man
o Woman
o Kids
o Dog
Sex object:
- Prevailing image of women as promiscuous liars Women want sex all the time, no self-control because of their own physical appetites; they are naturally good at lying.
- Solution: Keep your daughter and/or your wife under lock and key (SAME SOLN FOR CHILDLIKE)
- Rousseau: French philosopher and novelist & he was very popular (like Stephen Kind of Europe)
o Wrote a book called ‘Camile’ All of his books portrayed women as promiscuous liars
o These books were read by a mass audience who did not have tv, movies, or radio
o Young girls were raised hearing these books and thinking the image of women were promiscuous liars
o He is completely unapologetic towards women:
o PG 25 Rousseau “…a woman should never for a moment feel herself independent; she should be governed by fear to control her natural cunning (deceiving): She should be made a coquettish (flirty or a China doll made of thin porcelain only for display) slave (possession) in order to render her a more alluring object of desire, a sweeter companion to man, whenever he chooses to relax himself”
***Mary feels the two views of woman as childlike & sex objects are contradictory and they can’t both be true so therefore it’s irrational. Remember, she is an Enlightenment thinker so rationality is the most important thing. ***
Minor Argument #2 – Women’s Education (PG 26)
- Rousseau “But Rousseau…the whole point of female education is to render them pleasing” (It is not to teach them to think for themselves or to cultivate natural reason)
- Girls get a 4th grade education so they are taught basic arithmetic, grammar, history, but beyond the 4th grade, women are taught all throughout high school home economics, fashion, manners, etc.
- Mary also calls out Dr. Gregory; he wrote a textbook called “A Legacy to my Daughters”
o PG 27 – Dr. Gregory “The worthy Dr. Gregory…”
o She says he writes “cultivate a fondness for dress, because a fondness for dress is what comes natural to them” Basically, we are going to teach them to appreciate dress and jewelry because that is what come natural to them
o This is a “Natural Fallacy” The idea that was usually
1. Stereotypes are claimed to be true not because of society, culture, education, or upbringing, but rather because it is natural.
o Mary points out that most of the time, human behavior (male/female) is the result of society, culture, education, or upbringing…NOT NATURE.
o For example - Women were never given the opportunity to learn science so men were better at it
- Social constraints
o Men claimed that girls were naturally more sickly than boys because more girls died than boys
1. Mary says that girls were not allowed to play outside because it was seen as un-lady like and boys got fresh air, sunshine, climb trees, exercise, etc.
2. Corset It would push the diaphragm in and so they couldn’t take a full breath in so if they gasped due to bad news, they would fall over and faint This was seen as a physical weakness
Birth Control is the #1 event in history that has empowered women. It gives the choice to the woman.
Minor Argument #3 – “Friendship or Indifference inevitably follows love”
- Mary says it is the course of Nature that the honeymoon be over (the honeymoon will end)
- When this happens, 1 of 2 things will happen: (remember she is writing this to men)
1. HAPPY Your wife becomes your friend Only if she is your peer (meaning equal) & she will only be your peer if she is educated otherwise she is childlike… OR
2. UNHAPPY Your wife becomes like another kid in the house (just another mouth to feed and someone who is dependent on you) She is childlike and you will resent her
- This is another appeal to men.
- She thinks that men want wives to be their friends…is this true?
How Mary died
• She settled down and finally married a philosopher
• Had a daughter - Marry Shelly (Frankenstein)
• They didn’t get all of the placenta after birth and became infected
• 2 weeks of excruciating pain after giving birth after infection
• Her husband the philosopher knew about her life and told all the sex stuff she did and it became an overnight bestseller in Europe
• Unfortunately, Kant, Rousseau, etc. – she became a cautionary tale and held the book up and said this is what happens when you give a woman an education.
• There was a backlash against feminism and set it back 100 yrs.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Immanuel Kant
Immanuel Kant
•Lived in the 1700s; He was Prussian (German)
•He was a Protestant, Lutheran…After we review his philosophy, we will ask, was he Christian?
•Logician Philosophical logician
•Philosopher
•Ethicist specialized in ethics
•He was dissatisfied with the traditional picture of Christian Final Judgment (FJ)
According to Christianity, you must believe in Jesus Christ to be saved and go to heaven
•Kant believed that the picture of final judgment according to Christianity made God look unjust, arbitrary, and less than perfect.
•Keep in mind that Kant DID believe in God and he also believed in FJ (Final Judgment) and he also believed in Heaven and Hell. He doesn’t want to get rid of any of these concepts.
St. Thomas Aquinas
Catholic Christian who took the Bible literally as a history book.
Timeline from St. Thomas Aquinas’ perspective:
4004 BCE (Creation/Garden of Eden) He came up with this date according to genealogies which say who lived, who begat who, and specifically in years, how long they live. These go back to Adam.
3000 BCE Noah’s Flood
1500 BCE Exodus of Egypt God sends Moses to free the people of Egypt. God sends plagues and the Pharoah still says he won’t free the slaves and then the first born male child dies
Mt. Sinai God gives the people the 10 Commandments
3 CE Jesus Christ
400 CE The Council of Nicea Bible assembled
1200 CE Aquinas
1700 Kant
1985 Christian missionary work accomplished When Christian missionaries speculate they have spread the Gospel to every tribe of the Amazon jungle. Now everyone has heard of Jesus Christ
2011
December 21, 2012 World Ends
•There were a very select group of people before Jesus Christ went to Heaven: Noah, Abraham, Moses,
•God chose Israel to be a chosen people (from Exodus story); However, this offer was not made to everybody else. Kant felt like this was arbitrary behavior on God’s part to not allow everyone equal FJ.
•When God sent the people of Israel to Camen, they didn’t go in doing missionary work.
God’s Clipboard:
•According to Christianity, you will get to the FJ, and God will judge you according to a specific criteria. You must believe in:
oGod
oJesus Christ 4000 Years without Jesus Christ / Almost the entire 6000 Years, you have entire cultures who have never heard of Jesus
oBible 4400 Years without the Bible
•Kant says God is not judging justly because there is no real accountability. I had to know what I was supposed to do, and be able to do it, otherwise, it is not fair.
•Kant wants to create one standard by which everyone person gets judged by, before or after Jesus. Universal Moral Principal
If this is the case, many people would not go to heaven.
All of the following are unreliable reasons (according to Kant) for making ethical choices:
1.Consequences Because you can never know with certainty the outcome of any choice you make
a.Kant thinks this is like gambling you think you may know, but you want to know for damn sure you are doing the right thing and not leave anything up to chance.
2.Emotions Both positive & negative: because even love, sympathy can make you do bad things
a.Kant says making choices on positive emotions can make you do bad things as well as negative emotions.
b.Therefore, untrustworthy.
3.Love/Obedience for God Even faith in God can be misplaced/misled (9/11 terrorists)
a.9/11 men had faith in God and were devout; maybe their faith was misguided because they killed thousands in the name of God.
b.Same thing with Christians who kill doctors who perform abortions.
4.Means to an end You must never do anything unethical in order to accomplish a noble goal
a.Kant would say never do anything normally unethical to accomplish a goal because you have still done something unethical.
Categorical Imperative (This is the Universal Moral Principle)
Categorical Applies to everything, universal; and Imperative Give a command on what to do
“Act in such a way that you could will that your action become a universal maxim” (Kant said this)
- A maxim is a standard for behavior
Ethical dilemma: Should I steal ?
Universal maxim: Though shalt steal ?
Say this: …to all people, for all time, all the time. (to you)
•Kant is saying that you need to make your behavior the standard for everyone.
•So, standing at the cash register…you DO NOT steal.
•Kant says God decides what is right/wrong, not you!
•Kant says we go through this world deciding on our own what is right/wrong based on our wants and desires. This won’t pass with God
•Every human who has a rational soul has the ability to use the Categorical Imperative or the Rational Principle to know what to do.
•Every human has free will so she can actually follow the Categorical Imperative.
•Remember, Kant thinks accountability is a 2 sided coin:
o1. You have to KNOW what to do
o2. You have to be ABLE to do it
oThis is what God will judge us by.
•Kant thinks that no matter when you lived, you don’t have to live in any part of history to know this…it is just rational.
•The Categorical Imperative keeps you from doing all the (wrong) things want to do.
Rules for Applying the CI
1.You must separate the action you are considering from the particular context in which it is
a.This is often how we justify what it is we do
b.Steal in order to get my child medicine? NO, you have to separate the action (steal) from the context otherwise it only helps you justify stealing…but it is still wrong. You are not allowed to keep the context.
2.If you follow the CI, then you are not (never) responsible for the consequences of that act
a.Who killed the Jews? Not you, the Nazis. It was not your fault.
3.You must only consider whether the imperative is rational or not, not the consequences, you mustn’t even consider God’s final judgment.
a.Only think “Is this rational?” -- You are not supposed to think “Will God like this?”
b.God/Jesus is not in the Categorical Imperative so that even an atheist can follow the Categorical Imperative so that no one will be left out of the pearly gates & that every person gets a fair shot into heaven.
Let’s look at 3 ethical dilemmas:
1.Stealing from the cash register
•CI Don’t steal
2.Stealing a loaf of bread for a sickly child: Les Miserables (French Revolution play – character’s niece is sick and dying and he steals a loaf of bread to feed his niece)
•Action is JUST STEAL We cannot add the context of a sickly child!
•CI Don’t steal to save the sickly child (this is just a means to an end)
•We seem to disagree with the CI here because of the context…the action is still the same though.
3.Nazi dilemma, Berlin, 1940
•You know there are Jews next door. You hear a knock at the door and the Nazis ask you, “Are there Jews next door?”
•You can tell the truth (yes) or you can lie (no).
•Should I lie? - Thou shalt lie!...to all people, for all time, all the time. NOT RATIONAL so CI DON’T LIE.
•So you say yes.
Kant says we are playing God by deciding right/wrong. You are not responsible for the death of the sickly niece or the Jews. You never know the consequences of any action. Kant says don’t make your ethical decisions based on the consequences because you can never be 100% certain what will happen. The CI is always between YOU and GOD. Who killed the Jews? The Nazis, not you.
What is the role of Jesus Christ? To provide forgiveness of sins (salvation).
-Kant would say forgiveness is for sissies. Do you know what to do? Can you do it? – Then just do it.
-Kant would say there’s no need for forgiveness; If you know what to do every time, and you can do it, why do you need to be forgiven?
•Lived in the 1700s; He was Prussian (German)
•He was a Protestant, Lutheran…After we review his philosophy, we will ask, was he Christian?
•Logician Philosophical logician
•Philosopher
•Ethicist specialized in ethics
•He was dissatisfied with the traditional picture of Christian Final Judgment (FJ)
According to Christianity, you must believe in Jesus Christ to be saved and go to heaven
•Kant believed that the picture of final judgment according to Christianity made God look unjust, arbitrary, and less than perfect.
•Keep in mind that Kant DID believe in God and he also believed in FJ (Final Judgment) and he also believed in Heaven and Hell. He doesn’t want to get rid of any of these concepts.
St. Thomas Aquinas
Catholic Christian who took the Bible literally as a history book.
Timeline from St. Thomas Aquinas’ perspective:
4004 BCE (Creation/Garden of Eden) He came up with this date according to genealogies which say who lived, who begat who, and specifically in years, how long they live. These go back to Adam.
3000 BCE Noah’s Flood
1500 BCE Exodus of Egypt God sends Moses to free the people of Egypt. God sends plagues and the Pharoah still says he won’t free the slaves and then the first born male child dies
Mt. Sinai God gives the people the 10 Commandments
3 CE Jesus Christ
400 CE The Council of Nicea Bible assembled
1200 CE Aquinas
1700 Kant
1985 Christian missionary work accomplished When Christian missionaries speculate they have spread the Gospel to every tribe of the Amazon jungle. Now everyone has heard of Jesus Christ
2011
December 21, 2012 World Ends
•There were a very select group of people before Jesus Christ went to Heaven: Noah, Abraham, Moses,
•God chose Israel to be a chosen people (from Exodus story); However, this offer was not made to everybody else. Kant felt like this was arbitrary behavior on God’s part to not allow everyone equal FJ.
•When God sent the people of Israel to Camen, they didn’t go in doing missionary work.
God’s Clipboard:
•According to Christianity, you will get to the FJ, and God will judge you according to a specific criteria. You must believe in:
oGod
oJesus Christ 4000 Years without Jesus Christ / Almost the entire 6000 Years, you have entire cultures who have never heard of Jesus
oBible 4400 Years without the Bible
•Kant says God is not judging justly because there is no real accountability. I had to know what I was supposed to do, and be able to do it, otherwise, it is not fair.
•Kant wants to create one standard by which everyone person gets judged by, before or after Jesus. Universal Moral Principal
If this is the case, many people would not go to heaven.
All of the following are unreliable reasons (according to Kant) for making ethical choices:
1.Consequences Because you can never know with certainty the outcome of any choice you make
a.Kant thinks this is like gambling you think you may know, but you want to know for damn sure you are doing the right thing and not leave anything up to chance.
2.Emotions Both positive & negative: because even love, sympathy can make you do bad things
a.Kant says making choices on positive emotions can make you do bad things as well as negative emotions.
b.Therefore, untrustworthy.
3.Love/Obedience for God Even faith in God can be misplaced/misled (9/11 terrorists)
a.9/11 men had faith in God and were devout; maybe their faith was misguided because they killed thousands in the name of God.
b.Same thing with Christians who kill doctors who perform abortions.
4.Means to an end You must never do anything unethical in order to accomplish a noble goal
a.Kant would say never do anything normally unethical to accomplish a goal because you have still done something unethical.
Categorical Imperative (This is the Universal Moral Principle)
Categorical Applies to everything, universal; and Imperative Give a command on what to do
“Act in such a way that you could will that your action become a universal maxim” (Kant said this)
- A maxim is a standard for behavior
Ethical dilemma: Should I steal ?
Universal maxim: Though shalt steal ?
Say this: …to all people, for all time, all the time. (to you)
•Kant is saying that you need to make your behavior the standard for everyone.
•So, standing at the cash register…you DO NOT steal.
•Kant says God decides what is right/wrong, not you!
•Kant says we go through this world deciding on our own what is right/wrong based on our wants and desires. This won’t pass with God
•Every human who has a rational soul has the ability to use the Categorical Imperative or the Rational Principle to know what to do.
•Every human has free will so she can actually follow the Categorical Imperative.
•Remember, Kant thinks accountability is a 2 sided coin:
o1. You have to KNOW what to do
o2. You have to be ABLE to do it
oThis is what God will judge us by.
•Kant thinks that no matter when you lived, you don’t have to live in any part of history to know this…it is just rational.
•The Categorical Imperative keeps you from doing all the (wrong) things want to do.
Rules for Applying the CI
1.You must separate the action you are considering from the particular context in which it is
a.This is often how we justify what it is we do
b.Steal in order to get my child medicine? NO, you have to separate the action (steal) from the context otherwise it only helps you justify stealing…but it is still wrong. You are not allowed to keep the context.
2.If you follow the CI, then you are not (never) responsible for the consequences of that act
a.Who killed the Jews? Not you, the Nazis. It was not your fault.
3.You must only consider whether the imperative is rational or not, not the consequences, you mustn’t even consider God’s final judgment.
a.Only think “Is this rational?” -- You are not supposed to think “Will God like this?”
b.God/Jesus is not in the Categorical Imperative so that even an atheist can follow the Categorical Imperative so that no one will be left out of the pearly gates & that every person gets a fair shot into heaven.
Let’s look at 3 ethical dilemmas:
1.Stealing from the cash register
•CI Don’t steal
2.Stealing a loaf of bread for a sickly child: Les Miserables (French Revolution play – character’s niece is sick and dying and he steals a loaf of bread to feed his niece)
•Action is JUST STEAL We cannot add the context of a sickly child!
•CI Don’t steal to save the sickly child (this is just a means to an end)
•We seem to disagree with the CI here because of the context…the action is still the same though.
3.Nazi dilemma, Berlin, 1940
•You know there are Jews next door. You hear a knock at the door and the Nazis ask you, “Are there Jews next door?”
•You can tell the truth (yes) or you can lie (no).
•Should I lie? - Thou shalt lie!...to all people, for all time, all the time. NOT RATIONAL so CI DON’T LIE.
•So you say yes.
Kant says we are playing God by deciding right/wrong. You are not responsible for the death of the sickly niece or the Jews. You never know the consequences of any action. Kant says don’t make your ethical decisions based on the consequences because you can never be 100% certain what will happen. The CI is always between YOU and GOD. Who killed the Jews? The Nazis, not you.
What is the role of Jesus Christ? To provide forgiveness of sins (salvation).
-Kant would say forgiveness is for sissies. Do you know what to do? Can you do it? – Then just do it.
-Kant would say there’s no need for forgiveness; If you know what to do every time, and you can do it, why do you need to be forgiven?
Rene Descartes
Rene Descartes (1600s)
Considered father of modern philosophy & father of modern science (anticipates a lot of scientific method)
French, Catholic, Christian
Given best Jesuit education in Europe & from a wealthy family
After he graduates, his family expects him to become a politician, lawyer, scholar, etc. but, he becomes a mercenary soldier in the ‘30 Years War’ (bloodiest war in Europe – fought between Protestants vs. Catholics)
1. They were fighting over when exactly the wafer turned into the body of Christ during communion
He was at every battle, but never fought. He was at every signing but always on the sidelines so people believe that Descartes was a spy for the Vatican.
After 30 Years War, he settles in the Netherlands (Dutch Protestant) He moves far away from France because he wants to avoid the Spanish Inquisition. They are the branch of the Catholic Church responsible for censorship and punishment/conversion of pagans. If you were a Muslim/Jew, they would torture you until you converted to Catholicism. Censorship made sure no books were published that disagreed with the Catholic doctrine.
The Spanish Inquisition was interested in enforcing Thomism: 3 doctrines ‘canonized’ by the Catholic Church To canonize, they take a piece of work, like Aristotle, and make it equal to the Scripture/Bible so that you cannot disagree with it.
3 things you cannot disagree with according to the Church (through canonization):
1. Ptolemy’s Astronomy (Ancient Egyptian astronomer 1500 BCE) At this time, this is a 3000 year old idea
Idea is geocentrism – Earth is center of universe and all other planets go around it; Catholic Church also used Bible to justify this with the story that God made the sun stand still. The opposite is helio-centrism which Descartes suggests.
Galileo (Italy) lived during Descartes life and was one of the first people to take a telescope and turn it to the Heavens finding out that the Sun is standing still and the Earth was moving around. He published a book with his scientific findings and the Spanish Inquisition read it and he was put on the knees and recanted his statements and said he was wrong. All of his books were burned and no copies exist. He was lucky he didn’t get burned at the stake, but he was placed on house arrest for the rest of his life.
2. Galen’s Medicine (Roman surgeon – 1500 years old)
Idea that all sickness and disease is caused by an imbalance of bodily humors like bile: The cures were the big problem. If you have an imbalance of bodily humors, they would hang you upside down; blood - letting was the #1 way to supposedly cure the imbalance of bodily humors – They would bleed you until you passed out. Superstition, demon possession blamed for sickness and disease. There was a big belief of fairies and dwarfs also caused sickness. Witchcraft – Sp. Inq had a book to make a woman confess to being a witch.
Why would people believe in colorful bile? – because dissection/surgery of human bodies was illegal for theological reasons (not for scientific reasons) There was a belief that you would need your body for final judgment according to Catholic Church. The burned heretics to ashes to ensure that they didn’t have a body so they couldn’t get resurrected.
3. Aristotle’s Biology (500 BCE – At this time, a 2000 year old doctrine)
4 basic elements according to Aristotle: Water, Fire, Earth, Air: #4 is significant in western history (4 Gospels because there were 4 elements in the universe; 4 points of the compass;
Expected to believe on faith and not allowed to disagree with according to the Church
Which of these are false? ALL OF THEM
Descartes discovers on his own, single handedly finds out that they are false!
He was a philosopher and Mathematician and figured out they were all false using math. Mathematically, he found out the geocentricism is wrong He wrote a book called ‘Le Monde’ in which he explains it; he never published it. It was published after his death and hung around till about 1850 and then it was lost.
He also founded in his spare time:
1. Optics (glasses)
2. Modern Geometry
3. Exponents 22
4. Wrote Methods & Meditations
Descartes dissected human bodies and cats in his laboratory at night found that Galen’s Medicine and Aristotle’s Biology were both false
“Everything I was taught growing up turned out to be wrong”
He goes under the radar and then drops the bomb (builds a stealth bomber)
The book is called, “The Discourse on Method”
• He offers 4 Methodological Rules for Certainty – How can we be certain about anything?
1. “…never to accept anything is true that I did not plainly know to be such; avoid hasty judgment and prejudice, to include nothing more in my judgments than what presented itself to my mind so distinctly and so clearly that I did not have occasion to doubt it.”
• Don’t take anybody’s word for it It is a direct attack upon tradition. We do tradition because people before us did it. He says Thomism is a tradition.
• Avoid hasty judgment avoid tradition
• According to Descartes Certainty means the absence of doubt; Basically, if you can doubt it, you can’t be certain of it. [looking for capital T truth]
• If you are certain, you can’t doubt it!
2. “to divide each of the difficulties, I would examine into as many parts as possible and as was required to better resolve them”
• Dissection was illegal, but he couldn’t say to come out and start dissect
• Divide means dissect he says you should dissect to have a better understanding
• We must do this with human bodies and ideas break them down into small party
• Example: only way to find out there is no dwarf inside the body
3. “to conduct my thought in an orderly fashion by commencing with those objects that are simplest and easiest to know, in order to ascend little by little, as if by degrees to the knowledge of the most composite thing”
• Commencing or beginning with objects that are simple. Start with simple ideas/objects to understand more complex
• Ex: know 2+2=4 to get to E=mc2
4. “everywhere to make enumerations ( ) so complete as to be assured of having omitted nothing”
• Enumerations is a fancy word for list
• He can’t just come out and said Ptolemy, Galen, and Aristotle were wrong so he writes these Spanish Inquisition approved and mass published it and goes to all Catholic Universities and overnight becomes the most popular philosophers.
• It would be less than a hundred years after this that Thomism is de-canonized. beginning of the end of the middle ages and Spanish Inquisiton.
• “Discourse on Method becomes foundation of Scientific Method and also to be the basis for the attack against religion.
Meditations takes these methods and applies it to our fundamental idea
He is looking for one thing that he cannot doubt & he only finds one thing.
March 21, 2011
What 4 qualities should a perfect being possess?
• Caring Care about needs of others; selfless, compassionate
• Tolerant Because each being is different and unique: Patient, forgiving, respectful
• Wise have the knowledge to survive; be fair and just; logical
• Have Integrity
Descartes method is doubt He wants to doubt his way to certainty
- He wants to doubt everything that can be doubted and whatever is left, he can be certain of
- From this certainty, he will build more certainty. It’s like laying a foundation of certainty. He will ascend little by little to the knowledge of the most composite thing: the existence of God (the perfect being)
- What can I doubt according to Descartes?
o What can we doubt?
1. Science Ultimately untrustworthy, and it can be and has been wrong (Galileo’s physics) – It changes and is a self-correcting thing. (scientists are fallible and can make mistakes so we can doubt it)
2. Religion untrustworthy for the same reasons; it can be wrong, and is based on people (priests) and people are fallible and make mistakes so we cannot trust religion
3. Tradition We cannot trust tradition because it’s something we do just because somebody before us did it; Descartes would say you weren’t there when that first tradition started so it is untrustworthy
4. Five Senses He doesn’t believe you can trust your five senses because they can deceive you so they are doubtful; Ex: mirage get closer to it, and water isn’t there and geocentrism if you are outside, it appears that the sun is moving and we are still, but it isn’t; it was through math and science that we discovered geocentrism was false
5. Descartes says you can doubt waking consciousness; you don’t know if you are even awake
o Question: He says we can doubt everything but one single thing:
1. Answer: That I am doubting The only thing we can be certain of is that we are doubting
o Question: What is doing the doubting?
1. Answer: A thinking thing something thinking is doing the doubting
2. “I think, therefore, I am” (1st stone)
3. He believes he has proven that he exists (Cogito argument) Cogito ergo sum = I think, therefore, I am This point concludes that he exists
4. When he says “I”, he means soul.
o Question: What exists?
1. Answer: A soul apart from the body Someone must be doing the thinking apart from the body because the five senses is part of the body; there is something reasoning apart from the body without the five senses so there must be a thinking thing apart from the body hence the immaterial soul
2. Proven the existence of the soul
3. Mind, Body, Dualism idea that soul is separate and apart from the body, but still working in conjuction
4. Rational soul is 2nd stone
Descarte’s Proof for the Existence of God
P1: I have an idea of a perfect being
P2: I am capable of doubt
P3: Something capable of doubt (a human) cannot be perfect
• Perfect Being = perfect knowledge (to know all things that are logically possible to know)
P4: Something perfect, even an idea, cannot originate from something imperfect
• The nature of being perfect is being uncreated
/Conclusion: Something perfect must have given me this idea (which is also to say that God exists)
- The idea of a perfect being is evidence of a perfect being.
- There are Perfect and Imperfect Ideas
o Perfect Idea It must be that way (Perfect Being isn’t like a unicorn that can have different shades of pink for example…we say a perfect being is all-knowing, and that cannot change, therefore, it must be that way). (2+2=4)
1. Is Zeus a perfect idea? No
2. Perfect Ideas don’t originate from imagination and they don’t originate from sense experience – Zeus is the product of imagination
o Imperfect Idea
1. Unicorn Everyone had a different idea of a unicorn in their minds
- It is logically impossible for a Perfect Being to create something perfect because perfection can’t be created
- From what we’ve said, does the P1-P4 seem solid?
- If there is a perfect being, there is only one…why? Because it must be that way. Otherwise, they would be limited by each other.
Critique:
There is a flaw in this argument…clue: whenever a philosopher gives an argument, they smuggle in ideas into a premise. And, that idea makes the argument work. Which idea/concept does he smuggle in?
• When he says “I” in “I think, therefore, I am”, he means soul…the immaterial soul, that is.
• He smuggles concept of soul, but he doesn’t prove soul as apart from the body in the premises so if you don’t believe in the soul, the premises topples like a house of cards
• For Descartes, “I” means immaterial soul
• In Premise 1, Descartes assumes the existence of the soul, apart from the body, which has the idea of a perfect being
• Descartes believes that he has proven the soul
• If you do believe in the existence of a soul, then it works
• Therefore, Certainty of God is the TOP STONE
Descartes lived a life of luxury, but by time of 40, his money ran out. Princess Christina inherited Sweden. She was a hunter, swordfighter, and she wants Descartes has her court philosopher. He doesn’t get on the ship she sends because it is cold, so she is pissed that just books came back on the boat. 6 months later, he shows up, but Christina is a fickle woman, but now, she is interested in the Roman poets. She wants her philosophy lessons at dawn while she rode early in the cold morning. This is not something Descartes likes, but he does it anyways. 1 week of riding horses with her, he catches pneumonia, second week, he dies. She kicks his body into a pauper’s grave and France is pissed. France brought the skull back along with his fingers.
Considered father of modern philosophy & father of modern science (anticipates a lot of scientific method)
French, Catholic, Christian
Given best Jesuit education in Europe & from a wealthy family
After he graduates, his family expects him to become a politician, lawyer, scholar, etc. but, he becomes a mercenary soldier in the ‘30 Years War’ (bloodiest war in Europe – fought between Protestants vs. Catholics)
1. They were fighting over when exactly the wafer turned into the body of Christ during communion
He was at every battle, but never fought. He was at every signing but always on the sidelines so people believe that Descartes was a spy for the Vatican.
After 30 Years War, he settles in the Netherlands (Dutch Protestant) He moves far away from France because he wants to avoid the Spanish Inquisition. They are the branch of the Catholic Church responsible for censorship and punishment/conversion of pagans. If you were a Muslim/Jew, they would torture you until you converted to Catholicism. Censorship made sure no books were published that disagreed with the Catholic doctrine.
The Spanish Inquisition was interested in enforcing Thomism: 3 doctrines ‘canonized’ by the Catholic Church To canonize, they take a piece of work, like Aristotle, and make it equal to the Scripture/Bible so that you cannot disagree with it.
3 things you cannot disagree with according to the Church (through canonization):
1. Ptolemy’s Astronomy (Ancient Egyptian astronomer 1500 BCE) At this time, this is a 3000 year old idea
Idea is geocentrism – Earth is center of universe and all other planets go around it; Catholic Church also used Bible to justify this with the story that God made the sun stand still. The opposite is helio-centrism which Descartes suggests.
Galileo (Italy) lived during Descartes life and was one of the first people to take a telescope and turn it to the Heavens finding out that the Sun is standing still and the Earth was moving around. He published a book with his scientific findings and the Spanish Inquisition read it and he was put on the knees and recanted his statements and said he was wrong. All of his books were burned and no copies exist. He was lucky he didn’t get burned at the stake, but he was placed on house arrest for the rest of his life.
2. Galen’s Medicine (Roman surgeon – 1500 years old)
Idea that all sickness and disease is caused by an imbalance of bodily humors like bile: The cures were the big problem. If you have an imbalance of bodily humors, they would hang you upside down; blood - letting was the #1 way to supposedly cure the imbalance of bodily humors – They would bleed you until you passed out. Superstition, demon possession blamed for sickness and disease. There was a big belief of fairies and dwarfs also caused sickness. Witchcraft – Sp. Inq had a book to make a woman confess to being a witch.
Why would people believe in colorful bile? – because dissection/surgery of human bodies was illegal for theological reasons (not for scientific reasons) There was a belief that you would need your body for final judgment according to Catholic Church. The burned heretics to ashes to ensure that they didn’t have a body so they couldn’t get resurrected.
3. Aristotle’s Biology (500 BCE – At this time, a 2000 year old doctrine)
4 basic elements according to Aristotle: Water, Fire, Earth, Air: #4 is significant in western history (4 Gospels because there were 4 elements in the universe; 4 points of the compass;
Expected to believe on faith and not allowed to disagree with according to the Church
Which of these are false? ALL OF THEM
Descartes discovers on his own, single handedly finds out that they are false!
He was a philosopher and Mathematician and figured out they were all false using math. Mathematically, he found out the geocentricism is wrong He wrote a book called ‘Le Monde’ in which he explains it; he never published it. It was published after his death and hung around till about 1850 and then it was lost.
He also founded in his spare time:
1. Optics (glasses)
2. Modern Geometry
3. Exponents 22
4. Wrote Methods & Meditations
Descartes dissected human bodies and cats in his laboratory at night found that Galen’s Medicine and Aristotle’s Biology were both false
“Everything I was taught growing up turned out to be wrong”
He goes under the radar and then drops the bomb (builds a stealth bomber)
The book is called, “The Discourse on Method”
• He offers 4 Methodological Rules for Certainty – How can we be certain about anything?
1. “…never to accept anything is true that I did not plainly know to be such; avoid hasty judgment and prejudice, to include nothing more in my judgments than what presented itself to my mind so distinctly and so clearly that I did not have occasion to doubt it.”
• Don’t take anybody’s word for it It is a direct attack upon tradition. We do tradition because people before us did it. He says Thomism is a tradition.
• Avoid hasty judgment avoid tradition
• According to Descartes Certainty means the absence of doubt; Basically, if you can doubt it, you can’t be certain of it. [looking for capital T truth]
• If you are certain, you can’t doubt it!
2. “to divide each of the difficulties, I would examine into as many parts as possible and as was required to better resolve them”
• Dissection was illegal, but he couldn’t say to come out and start dissect
• Divide means dissect he says you should dissect to have a better understanding
• We must do this with human bodies and ideas break them down into small party
• Example: only way to find out there is no dwarf inside the body
3. “to conduct my thought in an orderly fashion by commencing with those objects that are simplest and easiest to know, in order to ascend little by little, as if by degrees to the knowledge of the most composite thing”
• Commencing or beginning with objects that are simple. Start with simple ideas/objects to understand more complex
• Ex: know 2+2=4 to get to E=mc2
4. “everywhere to make enumerations ( ) so complete as to be assured of having omitted nothing”
• Enumerations is a fancy word for list
• He can’t just come out and said Ptolemy, Galen, and Aristotle were wrong so he writes these Spanish Inquisition approved and mass published it and goes to all Catholic Universities and overnight becomes the most popular philosophers.
• It would be less than a hundred years after this that Thomism is de-canonized. beginning of the end of the middle ages and Spanish Inquisiton.
• “Discourse on Method becomes foundation of Scientific Method and also to be the basis for the attack against religion.
Meditations takes these methods and applies it to our fundamental idea
He is looking for one thing that he cannot doubt & he only finds one thing.
March 21, 2011
What 4 qualities should a perfect being possess?
• Caring Care about needs of others; selfless, compassionate
• Tolerant Because each being is different and unique: Patient, forgiving, respectful
• Wise have the knowledge to survive; be fair and just; logical
• Have Integrity
Descartes method is doubt He wants to doubt his way to certainty
- He wants to doubt everything that can be doubted and whatever is left, he can be certain of
- From this certainty, he will build more certainty. It’s like laying a foundation of certainty. He will ascend little by little to the knowledge of the most composite thing: the existence of God (the perfect being)
- What can I doubt according to Descartes?
o What can we doubt?
1. Science Ultimately untrustworthy, and it can be and has been wrong (Galileo’s physics) – It changes and is a self-correcting thing. (scientists are fallible and can make mistakes so we can doubt it)
2. Religion untrustworthy for the same reasons; it can be wrong, and is based on people (priests) and people are fallible and make mistakes so we cannot trust religion
3. Tradition We cannot trust tradition because it’s something we do just because somebody before us did it; Descartes would say you weren’t there when that first tradition started so it is untrustworthy
4. Five Senses He doesn’t believe you can trust your five senses because they can deceive you so they are doubtful; Ex: mirage get closer to it, and water isn’t there and geocentrism if you are outside, it appears that the sun is moving and we are still, but it isn’t; it was through math and science that we discovered geocentrism was false
5. Descartes says you can doubt waking consciousness; you don’t know if you are even awake
o Question: He says we can doubt everything but one single thing:
1. Answer: That I am doubting The only thing we can be certain of is that we are doubting
o Question: What is doing the doubting?
1. Answer: A thinking thing something thinking is doing the doubting
2. “I think, therefore, I am” (1st stone)
3. He believes he has proven that he exists (Cogito argument) Cogito ergo sum = I think, therefore, I am This point concludes that he exists
4. When he says “I”, he means soul.
o Question: What exists?
1. Answer: A soul apart from the body Someone must be doing the thinking apart from the body because the five senses is part of the body; there is something reasoning apart from the body without the five senses so there must be a thinking thing apart from the body hence the immaterial soul
2. Proven the existence of the soul
3. Mind, Body, Dualism idea that soul is separate and apart from the body, but still working in conjuction
4. Rational soul is 2nd stone
Descarte’s Proof for the Existence of God
P1: I have an idea of a perfect being
P2: I am capable of doubt
P3: Something capable of doubt (a human) cannot be perfect
• Perfect Being = perfect knowledge (to know all things that are logically possible to know)
P4: Something perfect, even an idea, cannot originate from something imperfect
• The nature of being perfect is being uncreated
/Conclusion: Something perfect must have given me this idea (which is also to say that God exists)
- The idea of a perfect being is evidence of a perfect being.
- There are Perfect and Imperfect Ideas
o Perfect Idea It must be that way (Perfect Being isn’t like a unicorn that can have different shades of pink for example…we say a perfect being is all-knowing, and that cannot change, therefore, it must be that way). (2+2=4)
1. Is Zeus a perfect idea? No
2. Perfect Ideas don’t originate from imagination and they don’t originate from sense experience – Zeus is the product of imagination
o Imperfect Idea
1. Unicorn Everyone had a different idea of a unicorn in their minds
- It is logically impossible for a Perfect Being to create something perfect because perfection can’t be created
- From what we’ve said, does the P1-P4 seem solid?
- If there is a perfect being, there is only one…why? Because it must be that way. Otherwise, they would be limited by each other.
Critique:
There is a flaw in this argument…clue: whenever a philosopher gives an argument, they smuggle in ideas into a premise. And, that idea makes the argument work. Which idea/concept does he smuggle in?
• When he says “I” in “I think, therefore, I am”, he means soul…the immaterial soul, that is.
• He smuggles concept of soul, but he doesn’t prove soul as apart from the body in the premises so if you don’t believe in the soul, the premises topples like a house of cards
• For Descartes, “I” means immaterial soul
• In Premise 1, Descartes assumes the existence of the soul, apart from the body, which has the idea of a perfect being
• Descartes believes that he has proven the soul
• If you do believe in the existence of a soul, then it works
• Therefore, Certainty of God is the TOP STONE
Descartes lived a life of luxury, but by time of 40, his money ran out. Princess Christina inherited Sweden. She was a hunter, swordfighter, and she wants Descartes has her court philosopher. He doesn’t get on the ship she sends because it is cold, so she is pissed that just books came back on the boat. 6 months later, he shows up, but Christina is a fickle woman, but now, she is interested in the Roman poets. She wants her philosophy lessons at dawn while she rode early in the cold morning. This is not something Descartes likes, but he does it anyways. 1 week of riding horses with her, he catches pneumonia, second week, he dies. She kicks his body into a pauper’s grave and France is pissed. France brought the skull back along with his fingers.
Ontological Argument
Proving God exists
Brief History:
• Ancient Greece falls
• Roman Empire (longest lasting ~ 1000 years)
• 4th century CE (400 years after Christ) – Roman emperor Constantine is battling against the Barbarians and is losing – he sees a gold cross, repents and accepts Christ – battle turns around and Romans win battle
1. After this, he added Holy so it’s the Holy Roman Emperor and this is how Catholic Church gets started and makes himself pope. (According to theologist, Peter was first pope)
2. Council of Nicea – council under Constantine – This is where the Bible is assembled – There are 4 Gospels: Mathew, Mark, Luke and John (Peter’s Gospel doesn’t make it in)
• Now we’re in 1000 CE (500 years before Protestantism) and we are in the thick of the Middle (Dark) Ages & Catholic Church has been around for 600 years now and are a powerhouse. During Middle Ages, there is no separation of church and state. The church made all governmental and religious laws. The Pope was president and leader of church
• Medieval Philosophy:
1. Done mostly by Catholic Christian clerics or monks only people who were literate at this time
2. The Bible is only in Latin (Scholarly language)
3. Medieval Christian philosophers had a high view of human reason (the use of logic and rationality)
4. They thought that capital R Reason (ability to use logic and rationality) was a gift from God (put in your soul) and given to everyone and as a result could be used to discover capital T Truth (sounds like Socrates) – Basically, you could “reason your way to faith”.
5. Saint Anselm (1000 CE) & Saint Thomas Aquinas (1200 CE)
They were both focused on proving God’s existence and the Christian doctrine
Aquinas spent hours by candlelight trying to prove existence
Reason functions like the Holy Spirit (Holy Spirit is supposed to move you and fill you)
Socrates & Plato
1. Both Anselm & Aquinas had the greatest respect for Socrates and Plato.
2. When Aquinas wrote his books, he would reference as Socrates and Plato but wouldn’t use their names; he called them “The Great Teachers”
3. They felt that Socrates and Plato came as close to the Truth (when Aquinas uses Truth, he means Christianity) as you can using Reason that God gave you without getting it right.
4. Socrates & Plato got close with the Form of the Good
o Side Note: Form of the Good according to Plato:
Immaterial
Absolute
Independent
Unchanging
Impersonal (like Gravity)
• If you add a mind (make it personal) and change Good to God Western God
5. You must believe in God and Jesus Christ Socrates and Plato did not have Jesus Christ
They wrote that Socrates & Plato were in hell (they lived 500 years before Jesus)
They believed Bible was history and science book and everything that happened in the book ACTUALLY happened
Believed in Hell, Purgatory and Heaven Most people go to Purgatory
Dante’s Divine Comedy
1. The Roman poet Virgil takes Dante on a personal tour of Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven
2. Along this trip, Dante describes Hell as a series of 7 concentric circles.
3. The bottom of Hell is the worst Satan is here and he is doing the torturing. He has 3 people in his mouth and chewing them and spitting them out for all eternity One is Judas (the disciple who betrayed Jesus); Second and third are Brutus and Cassius (the men who betrayed Julius Caesar)
4. The top level of Hell are Socrates and Plato
o They lived 500 years before Jesus so how did they know? How can you be held accountable for something that you couldn’t have done? Meaning, how could they be responsible for rejecting Jesus if Jesus wasn’t there?
6. Martin Luther
• Logical Argument is made up of
1. Premises (claims)
P1: (Premise 1) All men are mortal
P2: Socrates is a man
2. A Conclusion (/) which necessarily follows from the premises
3. Example:
P1: (Premise 1) All men are mortal
P2: Socrates is a man
Conclusion (/): Therefore (/) Socrates is mortal
• When you critique a logical argument, you must:
1. Never disagree with the conclusion
2. Must show that at least one of the premises is false – if you do that, then the conclusion is necessarily false
• The Ontological (The study of Being) Argument for the Existence of God (1000CE)
1. P1: God is the greatest or most perfect being
2. P2: A perfect being which exists, is greater or more perfect than a being which does not exist
3. / Because of these two premises, God MUST exist (it is logically impossible for God not to exist)
• Let’s analyze this:
1. P1: Amsel is not stating that God exist in P1 so it is not circular; rather, all Amsel is claiming is that anybody (theist or atheist) must agree that if God exists, the God would be the greatest. He’s talking about the “idea” of God here.
2. P2: Question – Which is better, the idea of a million bucks or a million bucks right there on the table? Of course the cash on the table. So which is better, the idea of something good ($) or the ‘actual’ something good ($ on table)? If you agree that the actual $ is better, then you agree that P2 is true.
3. /: A God or a perfect being which exists is better than a God which doesn’t exist so any perfect being (any God), in order to actually be perfect, must exist, for, to lack existence means you are not perfect.
4. Overall, this is a valid argument. The conclusion follows from the premises. To make it invalid, you have to have negative evidence against one of the premises.
1st critique of premises:
1. Guanilo A Catholic cleric
a. All medieval philosophers thought logic was a gift from God, but Guanilo thought Anselm used it incorrectly with the P1 and P2 arguments
b. His critique: Just because you have the idea of something doesn’t mean “poof” that it in fact exists. Here, he is attacking the conclusion
c. Anselm’s response to Guanilo saves his argument. He says the Ontological Argument (OA) only works for God. Why? Because the idea of a perfect being is completely, utterly, and absolutely unique. He says this argument only works for one thing: God. It doesn’t work for million bucks, etc. (If I imagine million bucks, and poof it appears. Can a unicorn poof? Sure, it could. Could a perfect being poof? This idea doesn’t poof because God is immaterial…there is no poofing of God. The minute God poofs, he ceases to be a perfect being.
Now, we are in 1700s.
Immanuel Kant
• Lutheran Christian
• He thought logic was a gift from God and Anselm used it incorrectly as well.
• He attacks P2 His critique: “Existence is not a predicate”
• In grammar and in logic, you have a subject and a predicate and they function similarly.
1. Ex: John is bald John is the subject. Is bald is the predicate.
• The purpose of a predicate is to add something to the subject. The predicate adds “is bald”, so we know John is bald.
• Kant will say existence cannot function as a predicate in the premises.
• Get an idea of unicorn in your head…
1. Unicorn is like a horse
2. Unicorn has a horn on its head
3. Unicorn is pink
4. Unicorn has wings
5. Unicorn exists
6. What changed to #6? Did anything get added to mental picture with #6? No.
7. Everytime there was a new predicate, something was added, but #6 didn’t add anything. This is what Kant meant, ‘exists’ doesn’t act like the other predicates.
• Overall, Kant says in P2, you cannot compare a perfect being which exists with a perfect being which does not exist because by adding the word “exist” onto perfect being, you haven’t really added anything. It’s not a predicate and doesn’t work like the other predicates do.
• Get an idea of God in your head…(subject first, predicate second)
1. God is perfectly free (can do anything that is logically possible)
2. God is perfectly knowing
3. God is perfectly good
4. God exists nothing was added to idea of God when we wrote this. This predicate ‘exists’ adds nothing to the subject.
• What is different about these two sets of predicates? Unicorn are physical quality predicates and God was abstract immaterial predicates so there is a disanalogy. With the unicorn example, you have the idea of physical attributes based on physical experiences you had. (each person put their own, pink, horn,, wings, etc) Each person used our own imagination to get the idea of the unicorn. And therefore, you have an imperfect idea because they are not all the same.
• What about God? Are we using our imagination? Zeus is a product of imagination because he’s a white guy with a penis. With the perfect being (P3 God), the idea is the product of Reason (it is the product of logic). All 3 qualities are logically necessary qualities and they can only be attributed to one idea – God.
• Has Kant missed the point? Has the idea of Anselm proved his argument stands with the idea that it only works for God?
Another activity:
• You hear people say “God exists” and “God does not exist”
• The more pertinent question might be: What’s the difference between these two statements?
• Is there a difference? Kant would erase the exists and does not exists, and there will be the same subject, God.
Brief History:
• Ancient Greece falls
• Roman Empire (longest lasting ~ 1000 years)
• 4th century CE (400 years after Christ) – Roman emperor Constantine is battling against the Barbarians and is losing – he sees a gold cross, repents and accepts Christ – battle turns around and Romans win battle
1. After this, he added Holy so it’s the Holy Roman Emperor and this is how Catholic Church gets started and makes himself pope. (According to theologist, Peter was first pope)
2. Council of Nicea – council under Constantine – This is where the Bible is assembled – There are 4 Gospels: Mathew, Mark, Luke and John (Peter’s Gospel doesn’t make it in)
• Now we’re in 1000 CE (500 years before Protestantism) and we are in the thick of the Middle (Dark) Ages & Catholic Church has been around for 600 years now and are a powerhouse. During Middle Ages, there is no separation of church and state. The church made all governmental and religious laws. The Pope was president and leader of church
• Medieval Philosophy:
1. Done mostly by Catholic Christian clerics or monks only people who were literate at this time
2. The Bible is only in Latin (Scholarly language)
3. Medieval Christian philosophers had a high view of human reason (the use of logic and rationality)
4. They thought that capital R Reason (ability to use logic and rationality) was a gift from God (put in your soul) and given to everyone and as a result could be used to discover capital T Truth (sounds like Socrates) – Basically, you could “reason your way to faith”.
5. Saint Anselm (1000 CE) & Saint Thomas Aquinas (1200 CE)
They were both focused on proving God’s existence and the Christian doctrine
Aquinas spent hours by candlelight trying to prove existence
Reason functions like the Holy Spirit (Holy Spirit is supposed to move you and fill you)
Socrates & Plato
1. Both Anselm & Aquinas had the greatest respect for Socrates and Plato.
2. When Aquinas wrote his books, he would reference as Socrates and Plato but wouldn’t use their names; he called them “The Great Teachers”
3. They felt that Socrates and Plato came as close to the Truth (when Aquinas uses Truth, he means Christianity) as you can using Reason that God gave you without getting it right.
4. Socrates & Plato got close with the Form of the Good
o Side Note: Form of the Good according to Plato:
Immaterial
Absolute
Independent
Unchanging
Impersonal (like Gravity)
• If you add a mind (make it personal) and change Good to God Western God
5. You must believe in God and Jesus Christ Socrates and Plato did not have Jesus Christ
They wrote that Socrates & Plato were in hell (they lived 500 years before Jesus)
They believed Bible was history and science book and everything that happened in the book ACTUALLY happened
Believed in Hell, Purgatory and Heaven Most people go to Purgatory
Dante’s Divine Comedy
1. The Roman poet Virgil takes Dante on a personal tour of Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven
2. Along this trip, Dante describes Hell as a series of 7 concentric circles.
3. The bottom of Hell is the worst Satan is here and he is doing the torturing. He has 3 people in his mouth and chewing them and spitting them out for all eternity One is Judas (the disciple who betrayed Jesus); Second and third are Brutus and Cassius (the men who betrayed Julius Caesar)
4. The top level of Hell are Socrates and Plato
o They lived 500 years before Jesus so how did they know? How can you be held accountable for something that you couldn’t have done? Meaning, how could they be responsible for rejecting Jesus if Jesus wasn’t there?
6. Martin Luther
• Logical Argument is made up of
1. Premises (claims)
P1: (Premise 1) All men are mortal
P2: Socrates is a man
2. A Conclusion (/) which necessarily follows from the premises
3. Example:
P1: (Premise 1) All men are mortal
P2: Socrates is a man
Conclusion (/): Therefore (/) Socrates is mortal
• When you critique a logical argument, you must:
1. Never disagree with the conclusion
2. Must show that at least one of the premises is false – if you do that, then the conclusion is necessarily false
• The Ontological (The study of Being) Argument for the Existence of God (1000CE)
1. P1: God is the greatest or most perfect being
2. P2: A perfect being which exists, is greater or more perfect than a being which does not exist
3. / Because of these two premises, God MUST exist (it is logically impossible for God not to exist)
• Let’s analyze this:
1. P1: Amsel is not stating that God exist in P1 so it is not circular; rather, all Amsel is claiming is that anybody (theist or atheist) must agree that if God exists, the God would be the greatest. He’s talking about the “idea” of God here.
2. P2: Question – Which is better, the idea of a million bucks or a million bucks right there on the table? Of course the cash on the table. So which is better, the idea of something good ($) or the ‘actual’ something good ($ on table)? If you agree that the actual $ is better, then you agree that P2 is true.
3. /: A God or a perfect being which exists is better than a God which doesn’t exist so any perfect being (any God), in order to actually be perfect, must exist, for, to lack existence means you are not perfect.
4. Overall, this is a valid argument. The conclusion follows from the premises. To make it invalid, you have to have negative evidence against one of the premises.
1st critique of premises:
1. Guanilo A Catholic cleric
a. All medieval philosophers thought logic was a gift from God, but Guanilo thought Anselm used it incorrectly with the P1 and P2 arguments
b. His critique: Just because you have the idea of something doesn’t mean “poof” that it in fact exists. Here, he is attacking the conclusion
c. Anselm’s response to Guanilo saves his argument. He says the Ontological Argument (OA) only works for God. Why? Because the idea of a perfect being is completely, utterly, and absolutely unique. He says this argument only works for one thing: God. It doesn’t work for million bucks, etc. (If I imagine million bucks, and poof it appears. Can a unicorn poof? Sure, it could. Could a perfect being poof? This idea doesn’t poof because God is immaterial…there is no poofing of God. The minute God poofs, he ceases to be a perfect being.
Now, we are in 1700s.
Immanuel Kant
• Lutheran Christian
• He thought logic was a gift from God and Anselm used it incorrectly as well.
• He attacks P2 His critique: “Existence is not a predicate”
• In grammar and in logic, you have a subject and a predicate and they function similarly.
1. Ex: John is bald John is the subject. Is bald is the predicate.
• The purpose of a predicate is to add something to the subject. The predicate adds “is bald”, so we know John is bald.
• Kant will say existence cannot function as a predicate in the premises.
• Get an idea of unicorn in your head…
1. Unicorn is like a horse
2. Unicorn has a horn on its head
3. Unicorn is pink
4. Unicorn has wings
5. Unicorn exists
6. What changed to #6? Did anything get added to mental picture with #6? No.
7. Everytime there was a new predicate, something was added, but #6 didn’t add anything. This is what Kant meant, ‘exists’ doesn’t act like the other predicates.
• Overall, Kant says in P2, you cannot compare a perfect being which exists with a perfect being which does not exist because by adding the word “exist” onto perfect being, you haven’t really added anything. It’s not a predicate and doesn’t work like the other predicates do.
• Get an idea of God in your head…(subject first, predicate second)
1. God is perfectly free (can do anything that is logically possible)
2. God is perfectly knowing
3. God is perfectly good
4. God exists nothing was added to idea of God when we wrote this. This predicate ‘exists’ adds nothing to the subject.
• What is different about these two sets of predicates? Unicorn are physical quality predicates and God was abstract immaterial predicates so there is a disanalogy. With the unicorn example, you have the idea of physical attributes based on physical experiences you had. (each person put their own, pink, horn,, wings, etc) Each person used our own imagination to get the idea of the unicorn. And therefore, you have an imperfect idea because they are not all the same.
• What about God? Are we using our imagination? Zeus is a product of imagination because he’s a white guy with a penis. With the perfect being (P3 God), the idea is the product of Reason (it is the product of logic). All 3 qualities are logically necessary qualities and they can only be attributed to one idea – God.
• Has Kant missed the point? Has the idea of Anselm proved his argument stands with the idea that it only works for God?
Another activity:
• You hear people say “God exists” and “God does not exist”
• The more pertinent question might be: What’s the difference between these two statements?
• Is there a difference? Kant would erase the exists and does not exists, and there will be the same subject, God.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Plato's Theory of Forms
Cup Show: What makes it a cup?
Because you can drink out of them, doesn’t mean it’s a cup
We’ve been taught they are cups
Plato’s magic show things that seem to change back and forth and become something else.
Plato’s Theory of Forms
This explains reality and knowledge; he wants to know, ‘how do we know what we know?’
Most of the time we know what we know, but most of the time we don’t know HOW we know they are cups.
So… What makes a cup a cup?
What was Plato reacting to? He reacts against 2 philosophers:
1. Protagoras said “Man is the measure of all things”
No capital T Truth because individuals determine reality, knowledge
We are talking about little t truth with Protagoras; it’s only a matter of opinion or preference
There is no matter of fact
Knowledge according to Protagoras is subjective (ultimately dependent upon individual experience and perception) - No capital T Truth Plato did not like this
2. Heraclitus said “You cannot step into the same river twice”
Reality is always changing (it is always in flux)
This also means that in knowledge is subjective and even more so that knowledge is ultimately unreliable for Heraclitus – there is no such thing as certainty
3. Both of these men were very extreme & Plato rejected both of these theories
Plato has 3 metaphysical objectives (Metaphysical=Study of things immaterial & Objective=goals) 3 things P wanted his theory to do…Reality should be:
1. Objective – Reality exists outside of our minds
2. Independent – Not dependent on anything else for its existence
3. Absolute – Meaning unchanging
All these 3 things/characteristics describe God, BUT PLATO IS NOT TALKING ABOUT GOD!! But, very similar to western religion.
According to Plato, knowledge should be certain, reliable, universal (available to everybody – Capital T Truth)s
Plato divides reality into 2 categories (Plato calls them 2 worlds):
1. The World of Becoming – This is populated with material (physical) objects which we will refer to as “Particulars” (ex: cup, people, birds, bees, etc.); Also, they are spatio-temporal meaning they are temporary or limited by time and space as all physical objects are; They are changing or more importantly, they are changeable
2. The World of Being – immaterial, non-physical “Forms” rather than “Particulars”; They are eternal meaning timeless; They are not limited by time and space; They are unchanging meaning they are absolute
For Plato, we are completely dependent upon the Forms for our knowledge – ex: if the ‘cupness Form’ didn’t come down and immanate the cup, we wouldn’t know what it was
Knowledge and certainty are not from 5 senses We knew what the cup was because the Form of cupness emanated
Why do the Forms do what they do? Why does cupness only go to cups? Plato suggests The Form of the Good
February 23, 2011
The Forms always “behave themselves” – meaning cupness doesn’t get into or emanate into rattlesnakes, and we may say “that’s a good thing”….but Why do the forms “behave themselves”?
The Forms are (=) impersonal…they have no mind. Think of it like an impersonal force like Gravity.
ANSWER Plato says the Forms “behave themselves” because of The Form of the Good.
The Form of the Good = that form above all other forms which makes them “behave themselves”.
The Form of the Good is impersonal also and yet it governs all other forms.
Why is it called The Form of the Good? Because “That’s a good thing” – It’s a good thing we know a cup from a rattlesnake.
This is as close as Plato gets to “God”
Now, the Question is: How do you ‘see’ an immaterial form with the material eye?
1. The physical eye sees physical Particulars
2. We need something immaterial to see something immaterial
3. Plato suggests the immaterial soul is seeing the immaterial form Your non-physical or (immaterial) soul sees non-physical (immaterial) forms
4. ANSWER: According to Plato, the soul is eternal in the strictness sense of the word meaning no beginning (no one made it) and no end
Plato says the soul always recognizes the forms, and the soul never makes a mistake…HOW?
1. Plato’s answer to How? The soul has seen the Forms before in a previous life NOT reincarnation because in transmigration of the soul…
1. There are no specific memories from previous lives, only knowledge of the Forms
2. The human soul (Form) can only emanate into human bodies (Particular)
3. What you emanate into has nothing to do with virtue
2. Its transmigration of the soul from one body to the next; The only thing the soul remembers are the Forms
3. When soul recognizes, it re-cognizing (recollecting it from memory) or re-collecting
Plato thought Beauty to be a Form; Beauty = symmetry
Allegory of the Cave & Analogy of the Sun
1. All people are born shackled (prisoners) – He can only look straight ahead to wall in front of him where there are shadows
a. What about the philosopher? Isn’t he shackled? Believes there are few people who can ask themselves questions and free themselves and Socrates was one of these
2. The prisoner thinks the shadow is the real thing because that’s all he has ever seen.
3. Philosopher (the hero) shows up; through questioning makes the prisoner free to stand up
4. Prisoner sees the rest of the cave, the fire(unnatural & artificial light), and prisoner realizes he was wrong about the shadows
a. Shadows are your prejudices and based on your upbringings, religious beliefs. If you believed something growing up, those are your shadows.
b. Plato doesn’t know who the guy is holding the cup. Who could it be?
i. Society/media
ii. Government
iii. Parents
iv. Teachers
v. Illuminati
vi. Peers/Colleague
vii. Church
5. Prisoner concludes that the Particular object (the cup) is the most real thing
6. Led up to world of light (sunshine) by more questioning & Prisoner now stands out of the cave
7. Sunlight (capital T Truth) hurts his eyes and Plato says at this point the prisoner has 2 choices:
a. Go back in the cave where its comfortable and familiar most people choose to do this because the Truth is too much for them even though they know there are shadows.
b. Stay and allow their eyes to get used to sunlight & prisoner realizes the existence of ‘cupness’
The Sun is The Form of the Good; FG is like the sun for 2 reasons:
1. The sun makes all life possible
2. It is by the sun that we see all things
Because you can drink out of them, doesn’t mean it’s a cup
We’ve been taught they are cups
Plato’s magic show things that seem to change back and forth and become something else.
Plato’s Theory of Forms
This explains reality and knowledge; he wants to know, ‘how do we know what we know?’
Most of the time we know what we know, but most of the time we don’t know HOW we know they are cups.
So… What makes a cup a cup?
What was Plato reacting to? He reacts against 2 philosophers:
1. Protagoras said “Man is the measure of all things”
No capital T Truth because individuals determine reality, knowledge
We are talking about little t truth with Protagoras; it’s only a matter of opinion or preference
There is no matter of fact
Knowledge according to Protagoras is subjective (ultimately dependent upon individual experience and perception) - No capital T Truth Plato did not like this
2. Heraclitus said “You cannot step into the same river twice”
Reality is always changing (it is always in flux)
This also means that in knowledge is subjective and even more so that knowledge is ultimately unreliable for Heraclitus – there is no such thing as certainty
3. Both of these men were very extreme & Plato rejected both of these theories
Plato has 3 metaphysical objectives (Metaphysical=Study of things immaterial & Objective=goals) 3 things P wanted his theory to do…Reality should be:
1. Objective – Reality exists outside of our minds
2. Independent – Not dependent on anything else for its existence
3. Absolute – Meaning unchanging
All these 3 things/characteristics describe God, BUT PLATO IS NOT TALKING ABOUT GOD!! But, very similar to western religion.
According to Plato, knowledge should be certain, reliable, universal (available to everybody – Capital T Truth)s
Plato divides reality into 2 categories (Plato calls them 2 worlds):
1. The World of Becoming – This is populated with material (physical) objects which we will refer to as “Particulars” (ex: cup, people, birds, bees, etc.); Also, they are spatio-temporal meaning they are temporary or limited by time and space as all physical objects are; They are changing or more importantly, they are changeable
2. The World of Being – immaterial, non-physical “Forms” rather than “Particulars”; They are eternal meaning timeless; They are not limited by time and space; They are unchanging meaning they are absolute
For Plato, we are completely dependent upon the Forms for our knowledge – ex: if the ‘cupness Form’ didn’t come down and immanate the cup, we wouldn’t know what it was
Knowledge and certainty are not from 5 senses We knew what the cup was because the Form of cupness emanated
Why do the Forms do what they do? Why does cupness only go to cups? Plato suggests The Form of the Good
February 23, 2011
The Forms always “behave themselves” – meaning cupness doesn’t get into or emanate into rattlesnakes, and we may say “that’s a good thing”….but Why do the forms “behave themselves”?
The Forms are (=) impersonal…they have no mind. Think of it like an impersonal force like Gravity.
ANSWER Plato says the Forms “behave themselves” because of The Form of the Good.
The Form of the Good = that form above all other forms which makes them “behave themselves”.
The Form of the Good is impersonal also and yet it governs all other forms.
Why is it called The Form of the Good? Because “That’s a good thing” – It’s a good thing we know a cup from a rattlesnake.
This is as close as Plato gets to “God”
Now, the Question is: How do you ‘see’ an immaterial form with the material eye?
1. The physical eye sees physical Particulars
2. We need something immaterial to see something immaterial
3. Plato suggests the immaterial soul is seeing the immaterial form Your non-physical or (immaterial) soul sees non-physical (immaterial) forms
4. ANSWER: According to Plato, the soul is eternal in the strictness sense of the word meaning no beginning (no one made it) and no end
Plato says the soul always recognizes the forms, and the soul never makes a mistake…HOW?
1. Plato’s answer to How? The soul has seen the Forms before in a previous life NOT reincarnation because in transmigration of the soul…
1. There are no specific memories from previous lives, only knowledge of the Forms
2. The human soul (Form) can only emanate into human bodies (Particular)
3. What you emanate into has nothing to do with virtue
2. Its transmigration of the soul from one body to the next; The only thing the soul remembers are the Forms
3. When soul recognizes, it re-cognizing (recollecting it from memory) or re-collecting
Plato thought Beauty to be a Form; Beauty = symmetry
Allegory of the Cave & Analogy of the Sun
1. All people are born shackled (prisoners) – He can only look straight ahead to wall in front of him where there are shadows
a. What about the philosopher? Isn’t he shackled? Believes there are few people who can ask themselves questions and free themselves and Socrates was one of these
2. The prisoner thinks the shadow is the real thing because that’s all he has ever seen.
3. Philosopher (the hero) shows up; through questioning makes the prisoner free to stand up
4. Prisoner sees the rest of the cave, the fire(unnatural & artificial light), and prisoner realizes he was wrong about the shadows
a. Shadows are your prejudices and based on your upbringings, religious beliefs. If you believed something growing up, those are your shadows.
b. Plato doesn’t know who the guy is holding the cup. Who could it be?
i. Society/media
ii. Government
iii. Parents
iv. Teachers
v. Illuminati
vi. Peers/Colleague
vii. Church
5. Prisoner concludes that the Particular object (the cup) is the most real thing
6. Led up to world of light (sunshine) by more questioning & Prisoner now stands out of the cave
7. Sunlight (capital T Truth) hurts his eyes and Plato says at this point the prisoner has 2 choices:
a. Go back in the cave where its comfortable and familiar most people choose to do this because the Truth is too much for them even though they know there are shadows.
b. Stay and allow their eyes to get used to sunlight & prisoner realizes the existence of ‘cupness’
The Sun is The Form of the Good; FG is like the sun for 2 reasons:
1. The sun makes all life possible
2. It is by the sun that we see all things
Trial & Death of Socrates
The Trial & Death of Socrates
• 399 BCE in Athens
• During this time, Athens is a democracy; But, no judges or juries. There was a mass audience of citizens who decided Socrates fate
• 3 accusations:
1. Corrupting the youth of Athens – making the young people doubt their parents, the laws of Athens, and the Greek religion
2. Worshipping strange gods; Basically, not worshipping the gods of Athens – Zeus
3. Atheism; Accused of being atheist
• Socrates was a celebrity at this point and this was the trial of the century
• 3 accusers (prosecutors) –
1. All 3 were all humiliated by Socrates at one point in time in different dialogues so the trial was a type of revenge
2. They all wanted the death penalty
• Aristaphanes wrote a playwright called “Clouds” that basically made fun of Socrates; idea that Socrates always had his head up in the clouds This influenced the opinion of the masses who watched and voted on Socrates’ fate
1. Irony is that Socrates was portrayed as a Sophist!
2. In the play, Socrates had a school which he charged money
• Sophists (philosophers) were enemies of the Socrates
1. The Sophists charged money to teach philosophy & Socrates considered this practice to be IMMORAL!
2. Sophists claimed that they could teach the youth to be virtuous – Socrates thought that you couldn’t ‘teach’ virtue
• It’s time for Socrates to give a defense for himself
1. Socrates does not really address the inconsistency between accusations 2 and 3.
2. He claims that all he has done was ask questions and never gave alternatives
3. So the prosecutors asked why are you asking so many questions? Why don’t you just stay home?
Socrates mentions the Oracle at Delphi which was a cave just outside of Athens. In ancient Greece, they considered that a God lived inside this cave. The God would tell you the answer, and would always tell you the truth and would never lie.
Socrates says his ‘friend’ asked Delphi who was the wisest person in the world, and the god said ‘Socrates’ so Socrates’ says he went everywhere asking questions trying to find someone wiser than him, but he said he couldn’t find anyone.
Socrates claims that he is on a mission from the god (oracle) to prove the god wrong and find someone wiser than him
The 2 things Socrates does: He mocks Oracle at Delphi which is very ancient; and he basically tells everyone there that they are not wiser than Socrates.
4. Socrates warns the people of Athens that by putting him to death, he is going to use their hypocrisy to teach all of history a lesson. But what is the lesson?
5. Socrates says, “If you kill me, if I die, I’m not afraid” – he didn’t think anyone should be afraid to die. His reason was that he was going to one of two places, which he doesn’t reeallly believe in but it’s the last final middle finger to religion:
Elysian Fields – Heaven for the Greeks; it was one big party (feast and orgy) – Only 2 types of people went there:
1. Soldiers who die in battle
2. The great poets: Homer, Hesiod, Simonides
Hades – big dark, wet cave in center of Earth – walk around bored because If I go to Hades, it’ll be fun because I’ll get to walk around and ask questions for eternity.
6. Now they take a vote & Socrates is condemned by a mere 30 votes. Plato was there watching as well.
7. But, they didn’t want to put him to death; there was a Greek tradition written into their laws saying that they condemned could decide their own punishment only in cases where the people thought the prosecutors were asking for too much.
8. Socrates makes suggestions for possible punishments (he continues to piss everyone off)
1. Pay a fine, but he was homeless so he suggested that everyone pitches in $5 to help pay his fine
2. Exile me – This was a big deal because honor was a HUGE deal, and exilement was a huge punishment
• But he said he would go around the world and keeping asking questions and give Athens a bad reputation
3. Can’t fine or exile me, so all that is left is death
9. So he is taken to prison and his disciples are allowed to visit him; Plato and others paid off the guards and trying to get him to escape, but Socrates refuses. Socrates says he has never broken a law and he is not a criminal and he wasn’t going to start now. “I’ve never broken a law, and I’m not about to start now”
10. Two dialogues were written 20 years after the trial
Apology
Phaedo This is where Socrates actually talks about his views on the afterlife during his last hours
11. The method of death was hemlock strong herbal poison relaxant mixed with wine
12. Socrates’ Famous Last Words: Takes goblet, raises it up, and says, “Don’t fear death, because when you die, one of two things is going to happen (neither of them aren’t that bad). Either:
1. Death is a dreamless sleep (meaning no afterlife)
2. What’s more likely to happen is that your soul survives the body & it goes on to have more adventures
He favors the idea that there is life after death & says either option isn’t that bad
13. The questions:
What is the lesson you think Socrates was trying to teach all of us?
1. Don’t be afraid to ask questions and tell the truth
2. Stand up for what you believe in
3. Don’t fear death
4. Capital T truth will triumph in the end – he dies, but we’re still talking about him
Be willing to die for what you believe in (combo of 2 & 3)
• 399 BCE in Athens
• During this time, Athens is a democracy; But, no judges or juries. There was a mass audience of citizens who decided Socrates fate
• 3 accusations:
1. Corrupting the youth of Athens – making the young people doubt their parents, the laws of Athens, and the Greek religion
2. Worshipping strange gods; Basically, not worshipping the gods of Athens – Zeus
3. Atheism; Accused of being atheist
• Socrates was a celebrity at this point and this was the trial of the century
• 3 accusers (prosecutors) –
1. All 3 were all humiliated by Socrates at one point in time in different dialogues so the trial was a type of revenge
2. They all wanted the death penalty
• Aristaphanes wrote a playwright called “Clouds” that basically made fun of Socrates; idea that Socrates always had his head up in the clouds This influenced the opinion of the masses who watched and voted on Socrates’ fate
1. Irony is that Socrates was portrayed as a Sophist!
2. In the play, Socrates had a school which he charged money
• Sophists (philosophers) were enemies of the Socrates
1. The Sophists charged money to teach philosophy & Socrates considered this practice to be IMMORAL!
2. Sophists claimed that they could teach the youth to be virtuous – Socrates thought that you couldn’t ‘teach’ virtue
• It’s time for Socrates to give a defense for himself
1. Socrates does not really address the inconsistency between accusations 2 and 3.
2. He claims that all he has done was ask questions and never gave alternatives
3. So the prosecutors asked why are you asking so many questions? Why don’t you just stay home?
Socrates mentions the Oracle at Delphi which was a cave just outside of Athens. In ancient Greece, they considered that a God lived inside this cave. The God would tell you the answer, and would always tell you the truth and would never lie.
Socrates says his ‘friend’ asked Delphi who was the wisest person in the world, and the god said ‘Socrates’ so Socrates’ says he went everywhere asking questions trying to find someone wiser than him, but he said he couldn’t find anyone.
Socrates claims that he is on a mission from the god (oracle) to prove the god wrong and find someone wiser than him
The 2 things Socrates does: He mocks Oracle at Delphi which is very ancient; and he basically tells everyone there that they are not wiser than Socrates.
4. Socrates warns the people of Athens that by putting him to death, he is going to use their hypocrisy to teach all of history a lesson. But what is the lesson?
5. Socrates says, “If you kill me, if I die, I’m not afraid” – he didn’t think anyone should be afraid to die. His reason was that he was going to one of two places, which he doesn’t reeallly believe in but it’s the last final middle finger to religion:
Elysian Fields – Heaven for the Greeks; it was one big party (feast and orgy) – Only 2 types of people went there:
1. Soldiers who die in battle
2. The great poets: Homer, Hesiod, Simonides
Hades – big dark, wet cave in center of Earth – walk around bored because If I go to Hades, it’ll be fun because I’ll get to walk around and ask questions for eternity.
6. Now they take a vote & Socrates is condemned by a mere 30 votes. Plato was there watching as well.
7. But, they didn’t want to put him to death; there was a Greek tradition written into their laws saying that they condemned could decide their own punishment only in cases where the people thought the prosecutors were asking for too much.
8. Socrates makes suggestions for possible punishments (he continues to piss everyone off)
1. Pay a fine, but he was homeless so he suggested that everyone pitches in $5 to help pay his fine
2. Exile me – This was a big deal because honor was a HUGE deal, and exilement was a huge punishment
• But he said he would go around the world and keeping asking questions and give Athens a bad reputation
3. Can’t fine or exile me, so all that is left is death
9. So he is taken to prison and his disciples are allowed to visit him; Plato and others paid off the guards and trying to get him to escape, but Socrates refuses. Socrates says he has never broken a law and he is not a criminal and he wasn’t going to start now. “I’ve never broken a law, and I’m not about to start now”
10. Two dialogues were written 20 years after the trial
Apology
Phaedo This is where Socrates actually talks about his views on the afterlife during his last hours
11. The method of death was hemlock strong herbal poison relaxant mixed with wine
12. Socrates’ Famous Last Words: Takes goblet, raises it up, and says, “Don’t fear death, because when you die, one of two things is going to happen (neither of them aren’t that bad). Either:
1. Death is a dreamless sleep (meaning no afterlife)
2. What’s more likely to happen is that your soul survives the body & it goes on to have more adventures
He favors the idea that there is life after death & says either option isn’t that bad
13. The questions:
What is the lesson you think Socrates was trying to teach all of us?
1. Don’t be afraid to ask questions and tell the truth
2. Stand up for what you believe in
3. Don’t fear death
4. Capital T truth will triumph in the end – he dies, but we’re still talking about him
Be willing to die for what you believe in (combo of 2 & 3)
Pre-Socratic Philosophy
Pre-Socratic Philosophers
• First to express discontent with Greek religion on these questions:
1. What is the true nature of reality?
2. What is its origin?
3. What is out place in it?
4. How are we related to the powers that govern it?
5. What is the best way to live?
• Hesiod “Thoegony”-
o “Chaos was first of all but next appeared Broad bosomed Earth”
o They will seek instead rational, natural explanations vs. supernatural or poetic explanations
o Proto-scientist Pre-Socratic philosophers that would observe and then speculate
Their mantra – “Explain what you see & touch by what you can see and touch”
o Problem of the one and the many
Q: If reality is in some sense one, what accounts for the many different individual things that we experience? In other words:
1. What is the ultimate reality? (the One) Is it God, matter, elements, etc.? How does this or it manifest itself into so many different ways? (rocks, trees, birds, etc.)
2. How is everything else (the Many) related to each other?
• Thales (considered 1st philosopher)
o Lived in Miletus which is currently Turkey
o He was considered “Mr. H2O” He believed that water is “the One” This answered #1 from above
He said:
1. “The cause & element of all things is water”
2. “All things are filled with gods” (Poetic part)
Reasons to suggest water was “the One”
1. Water nourishes all things; all of life dependent on water
2. Water is the only naturally occurring substance to change forms (solid, liquid, gas)
3. Water is all around us (rivers, streams, ponds, etc.) This answered #2 from above
4. Miletus is on the coast so this explains where his philosophy possibly originated from
o He believed water behaved like gods because water was everywhere (a poetic thing to say)
• Xenophanes
o First to explicitly criticize the Greek religion (Thales implicitly critiqued – subtly explained the water idea)
o Xenophanes said that the Greek gods/goddesses were unworthy of worship (because of the way they behave – this was Xenophanes’ ‘clue’)
o According to Homer & Hesiod, gods stole, lied, cheated, raped, murdered so Xenophanes said if we don’t act like this, why do we worship gods that behave like this?
o Conclusion: Homer & Hesiod are fiction & made up stories
o “God does not make us in his image, rather we make god/goddesses in our image”
o First person to suggest “…one god, greatest amongst gods, in no way similar to mortals in mind or body”
o He is suggesting an immaterial (non-physical), no gender & not similar to our minds and above negative emotions (like anger, temper, jealousy) of humans. They may have positive emotions like love, justice, etc.
o He says god:
1. “sees all over”
2. “thinks all over” (knows everything)
3. “hears all over”
4. Remains the same (gods not limited, god does not change)
5. God sets all things in motion with the power of his mind
o He suggest god has a mind & therefore, god is personal & one of the FIRST to suggest monotheism
January 31, 2011
The Problem of the One & the Many:
1. What is the Ultimate Reality (the One)
2. How is everything else (the Many) related to it?
• Democrates
Side Note: Parmenides denies the existence of “the Many” and suggests rather that all reality is “the One” we can compare this to Eastern philosophy like Buddhism (no separation between god and everything else…he IS everything or all “the Many” is the Ultimate Reality)
o Democrates REJECTS Parmenides ideas & reacts against him with a kind of compromise.
o Democrates asks the Q: If everything (the Many) is really just ‘the One’, then how do you explain movement? Democrates speculated that things, i.e. the Many, move. He says that if everything was ‘the One’, then everything would sit still.
He compromises and says ‘the One’ is both ‘atamos’ and ‘the Void’. ‘the Void’ is the empty space between atamos. This ‘Void’ was necessary to explain emotion.
He says ‘atamos; (the physical stuff) was the Ultimate Element meaning physical
• He said the ‘atamos’ were tiny particles like dust motes except smaller, but he said that they are so tiny that you can’t see them; however he says “let me describe them to you”.
• 6 characteristics of atamos:
1. They are Invisible to us or the naked eye (physically; he didn’t mean like a ghost)
2. They are Indivisible or “Unsplittable” This is why he named it ‘atamos’ which literally means unsplittable or uncuttable. (He was wrong on this one – His reasoning was that they are the Ultimate Reality or Ultimate physical stuff to which everything is made so you shouldn’t be able to split it)
3. He said because they are Indivisible, they are indestructible. He was wrong about the ‘because’, but he was right that they are indestructible. (atoms are like legos – you can build, tear apart and rebuild, but the legos do not change)
4. He said they are in constant motion. The tiny motion was made possible because of ‘the Void’. The tiny movement makes all movement possible.
5. Such motion is made possible by ‘the Void’
6. It is their nature to move meaning they do not require an external force of motion (cause & effect). He’s implying that they don’t need god.
He suggests that ‘atamos’ are internally homogenous meaning it is all the same on the inside; however, externally, they are different in:
1. Shape & Size A differs in shape & size from N
2. Arrangement AN differs in arrangement from NA
3. Position A differs in position in the alphabet from N
He asks, how do atoms stick together? He says that each atamos has tiny little hooks and come together with other little atamos with hooks and stick together. (This was clearly not true)
He asks the Q: Why is a rock harder to cut with a knife than an apple?
• He thought you were cutting in between the atamos and cutting the hooks in the Void. You weren’t cutting the atamos itself. He was partly right because he anticipated DENSITY, but wrong about the hooks. – These were typical type questions that Pre-Socratic philosophers asked themselves from observing & speculating.
o Democrates has an implicit critique of Greek religion. He leaves no room for god. In his theory of the universe, there is no need for God/goddesses because the atamos explain and do everything.
o One of the first Naturalistic philosophers meaning there is no connection to a supernatural force (god) – everything was a naturalistic explanation.
o Democrates did believe in the existence of a soul (seems contradictory because the soul is immaterial or non-physical) Traditionally, the soul was immaterial, but Democrates was the only person in western philosophy to suggest a material soul. Remember that he said atamos can be different shapes and sizes…so Democrates said that there are other atamos which are even smaller than the original and that they were spherical. He said these spherical atamos would fit in between the other atamos with the hooks and Void still being there. These spherical atamos in between the other atamos were responsible for intelligence. The bigger atamos were not intelligent. The amount of spherical atamos determined the level of intelligence so for example, a rock had no spherical atamos, but a plant, which is alive, had a few of the spherical atamos. Humans had the most spherical atamos. So he meant that the material soul was a conglomeration or concentration of spherical atoms.
o Democrates says that at the moment of death, the spherical atamos go away and form something else, and they don’t carry any memory.
• First to express discontent with Greek religion on these questions:
1. What is the true nature of reality?
2. What is its origin?
3. What is out place in it?
4. How are we related to the powers that govern it?
5. What is the best way to live?
• Hesiod “Thoegony”-
o “Chaos was first of all but next appeared Broad bosomed Earth”
o They will seek instead rational, natural explanations vs. supernatural or poetic explanations
o Proto-scientist Pre-Socratic philosophers that would observe and then speculate
Their mantra – “Explain what you see & touch by what you can see and touch”
o Problem of the one and the many
Q: If reality is in some sense one, what accounts for the many different individual things that we experience? In other words:
1. What is the ultimate reality? (the One) Is it God, matter, elements, etc.? How does this or it manifest itself into so many different ways? (rocks, trees, birds, etc.)
2. How is everything else (the Many) related to each other?
• Thales (considered 1st philosopher)
o Lived in Miletus which is currently Turkey
o He was considered “Mr. H2O” He believed that water is “the One” This answered #1 from above
He said:
1. “The cause & element of all things is water”
2. “All things are filled with gods” (Poetic part)
Reasons to suggest water was “the One”
1. Water nourishes all things; all of life dependent on water
2. Water is the only naturally occurring substance to change forms (solid, liquid, gas)
3. Water is all around us (rivers, streams, ponds, etc.) This answered #2 from above
4. Miletus is on the coast so this explains where his philosophy possibly originated from
o He believed water behaved like gods because water was everywhere (a poetic thing to say)
• Xenophanes
o First to explicitly criticize the Greek religion (Thales implicitly critiqued – subtly explained the water idea)
o Xenophanes said that the Greek gods/goddesses were unworthy of worship (because of the way they behave – this was Xenophanes’ ‘clue’)
o According to Homer & Hesiod, gods stole, lied, cheated, raped, murdered so Xenophanes said if we don’t act like this, why do we worship gods that behave like this?
o Conclusion: Homer & Hesiod are fiction & made up stories
o “God does not make us in his image, rather we make god/goddesses in our image”
o First person to suggest “…one god, greatest amongst gods, in no way similar to mortals in mind or body”
o He is suggesting an immaterial (non-physical), no gender & not similar to our minds and above negative emotions (like anger, temper, jealousy) of humans. They may have positive emotions like love, justice, etc.
o He says god:
1. “sees all over”
2. “thinks all over” (knows everything)
3. “hears all over”
4. Remains the same (gods not limited, god does not change)
5. God sets all things in motion with the power of his mind
o He suggest god has a mind & therefore, god is personal & one of the FIRST to suggest monotheism
January 31, 2011
The Problem of the One & the Many:
1. What is the Ultimate Reality (the One)
2. How is everything else (the Many) related to it?
• Democrates
Side Note: Parmenides denies the existence of “the Many” and suggests rather that all reality is “the One” we can compare this to Eastern philosophy like Buddhism (no separation between god and everything else…he IS everything or all “the Many” is the Ultimate Reality)
o Democrates REJECTS Parmenides ideas & reacts against him with a kind of compromise.
o Democrates asks the Q: If everything (the Many) is really just ‘the One’, then how do you explain movement? Democrates speculated that things, i.e. the Many, move. He says that if everything was ‘the One’, then everything would sit still.
He compromises and says ‘the One’ is both ‘atamos’ and ‘the Void’. ‘the Void’ is the empty space between atamos. This ‘Void’ was necessary to explain emotion.
He says ‘atamos; (the physical stuff) was the Ultimate Element meaning physical
• He said the ‘atamos’ were tiny particles like dust motes except smaller, but he said that they are so tiny that you can’t see them; however he says “let me describe them to you”.
• 6 characteristics of atamos:
1. They are Invisible to us or the naked eye (physically; he didn’t mean like a ghost)
2. They are Indivisible or “Unsplittable” This is why he named it ‘atamos’ which literally means unsplittable or uncuttable. (He was wrong on this one – His reasoning was that they are the Ultimate Reality or Ultimate physical stuff to which everything is made so you shouldn’t be able to split it)
3. He said because they are Indivisible, they are indestructible. He was wrong about the ‘because’, but he was right that they are indestructible. (atoms are like legos – you can build, tear apart and rebuild, but the legos do not change)
4. He said they are in constant motion. The tiny motion was made possible because of ‘the Void’. The tiny movement makes all movement possible.
5. Such motion is made possible by ‘the Void’
6. It is their nature to move meaning they do not require an external force of motion (cause & effect). He’s implying that they don’t need god.
He suggests that ‘atamos’ are internally homogenous meaning it is all the same on the inside; however, externally, they are different in:
1. Shape & Size A differs in shape & size from N
2. Arrangement AN differs in arrangement from NA
3. Position A differs in position in the alphabet from N
He asks, how do atoms stick together? He says that each atamos has tiny little hooks and come together with other little atamos with hooks and stick together. (This was clearly not true)
He asks the Q: Why is a rock harder to cut with a knife than an apple?
• He thought you were cutting in between the atamos and cutting the hooks in the Void. You weren’t cutting the atamos itself. He was partly right because he anticipated DENSITY, but wrong about the hooks. – These were typical type questions that Pre-Socratic philosophers asked themselves from observing & speculating.
o Democrates has an implicit critique of Greek religion. He leaves no room for god. In his theory of the universe, there is no need for God/goddesses because the atamos explain and do everything.
o One of the first Naturalistic philosophers meaning there is no connection to a supernatural force (god) – everything was a naturalistic explanation.
o Democrates did believe in the existence of a soul (seems contradictory because the soul is immaterial or non-physical) Traditionally, the soul was immaterial, but Democrates was the only person in western philosophy to suggest a material soul. Remember that he said atamos can be different shapes and sizes…so Democrates said that there are other atamos which are even smaller than the original and that they were spherical. He said these spherical atamos would fit in between the other atamos with the hooks and Void still being there. These spherical atamos in between the other atamos were responsible for intelligence. The bigger atamos were not intelligent. The amount of spherical atamos determined the level of intelligence so for example, a rock had no spherical atamos, but a plant, which is alive, had a few of the spherical atamos. Humans had the most spherical atamos. So he meant that the material soul was a conglomeration or concentration of spherical atoms.
o Democrates says that at the moment of death, the spherical atamos go away and form something else, and they don’t carry any memory.
Ancient Greece - Cradle of Western Civilization
Ancient Greece “The Cradle of Western Civilization” (500-323 BCE) for a brief 150 years in/around a single city, Athens, our modern society was anticipated/influenced by ancient Greeks.
• Grouping (polis) of city states around the Mediterranean – Turkey – Italy
• Each city state had a government and an army
• Most of our ideas started from Ancient Greece
• BCE = Before Common Era
• After the 150 years all this knowledge & advancement wouldn’t show up again for another 2000 years.
• City states shared 3 things:
o Language
o Money
o Religion (Greek mythology)
• Around 500 BCE Persian army invades Ancient Greece
o 2 city states, Sparta & Athens join forces and defeat the large Persians @ the Battle of Marathon (Socrates fought at this Battle)
o After this victory begins the 150 years and Athens now becomes the 1st democracy in the western world – Remember: only lasted 150 years
Major developments by the Greeks
1. Politics
a. Every citizen counts as 1 Egalitarianism (Democracy was about citizen’s (men) rights, not humans (women)
b. Athens was a pure democracy meaning no representatives of any kind. (we have a representative democracy) If a law was proposed, the citizens vote on it directly with each having one vote a piece.
i. As a result, there were no judges/juries citizens could come and watch proceedings and vote
c. “King for a day” – Once a year, one person got to be kind of Athens. They could let people out of prison or pass laws they liked, and this reminded people how good a democracy was and showed how too much power from one person or king would be.
2. Literature (Greeks held these books like the bible)
a. Homer (Iliad & Odyssey)
i. Iliad Trojan War fought over Helen of Troy. The Greeks won by tricking them with the Trojan Horse
ii. Odyssey Odyssey (Greek hero) & his travels around the Mediterranean Sea. It included Cyclops that Odysseus fought. The Sirens were women who sang & seduced sailors.
b. Hesiod
i. Theogony Series of creation stories Zeus’ father – Kronos created universe (polytheism many gods/goddesses)
Side Note: Plutarch’s Lives & King James Bible used to teach European & US kids how to read.
3. Drama
a. Aeschylus (play writer)
i. Usually, characters wearing masks & chorus (choir)- The chorus “spoke” the lines through the singing, but Aeschylus was the first to have characters that actually spoke to each other without the Greek chorus.
4. Genres
a. Greeks were the first to distinguish genres of Tragedy & Comedy
5. Math & Science (Note: Father means the first to put ideas into writing)
a. Father of Math was Pythagoras
i. Pythagorean theorem
ii. ∏ = 3.14…. infinite # he created suggested infinity (now it is called “irrational” number)
iii. Pythagoras believed that numbers were divine because only infinite things are divine so he began a “Math religion” – He thought working out math problems was like praying or meditating & the more you worked out a problem, the closer you got to the divine.
iv. His symbol is the pentagram which was worn for the “Math religion”
b. Father of Geometry was Euclid
i. His books are the only ones that have survived
c. Father of Medicine was Hippocrates
i. Hippocratic Oath
ii. Theurgy movement of the gods/divine
1. Idea that medicine & religion were mixed
2. They never sought a natural cure, they always looked for a supernatural cure EX: Pretty woman who had a stomach ache was because Athena was jealous
iii. Hippocrates was the 1st to DENY theurgy and 1st to suggest natural cures rather than supernatural
iv. He invented the open-air hospital he put the hospitals on a hill with lots of sunshine. The people got better, but NOT because of their knowledge of germs
v. As a result of open-air hospital, the life expectancy rose from mid 30s 80s, but only for this brief period of 150 years. The Roman empire came around for approximately 1000 years and the life expectancy went back down to 50s
• Grouping (polis) of city states around the Mediterranean – Turkey – Italy
• Each city state had a government and an army
• Most of our ideas started from Ancient Greece
• BCE = Before Common Era
• After the 150 years all this knowledge & advancement wouldn’t show up again for another 2000 years.
• City states shared 3 things:
o Language
o Money
o Religion (Greek mythology)
• Around 500 BCE Persian army invades Ancient Greece
o 2 city states, Sparta & Athens join forces and defeat the large Persians @ the Battle of Marathon (Socrates fought at this Battle)
o After this victory begins the 150 years and Athens now becomes the 1st democracy in the western world – Remember: only lasted 150 years
Major developments by the Greeks
1. Politics
a. Every citizen counts as 1 Egalitarianism (Democracy was about citizen’s (men) rights, not humans (women)
b. Athens was a pure democracy meaning no representatives of any kind. (we have a representative democracy) If a law was proposed, the citizens vote on it directly with each having one vote a piece.
i. As a result, there were no judges/juries citizens could come and watch proceedings and vote
c. “King for a day” – Once a year, one person got to be kind of Athens. They could let people out of prison or pass laws they liked, and this reminded people how good a democracy was and showed how too much power from one person or king would be.
2. Literature (Greeks held these books like the bible)
a. Homer (Iliad & Odyssey)
i. Iliad Trojan War fought over Helen of Troy. The Greeks won by tricking them with the Trojan Horse
ii. Odyssey Odyssey (Greek hero) & his travels around the Mediterranean Sea. It included Cyclops that Odysseus fought. The Sirens were women who sang & seduced sailors.
b. Hesiod
i. Theogony Series of creation stories Zeus’ father – Kronos created universe (polytheism many gods/goddesses)
Side Note: Plutarch’s Lives & King James Bible used to teach European & US kids how to read.
3. Drama
a. Aeschylus (play writer)
i. Usually, characters wearing masks & chorus (choir)- The chorus “spoke” the lines through the singing, but Aeschylus was the first to have characters that actually spoke to each other without the Greek chorus.
4. Genres
a. Greeks were the first to distinguish genres of Tragedy & Comedy
5. Math & Science (Note: Father means the first to put ideas into writing)
a. Father of Math was Pythagoras
i. Pythagorean theorem
ii. ∏ = 3.14…. infinite # he created suggested infinity (now it is called “irrational” number)
iii. Pythagoras believed that numbers were divine because only infinite things are divine so he began a “Math religion” – He thought working out math problems was like praying or meditating & the more you worked out a problem, the closer you got to the divine.
iv. His symbol is the pentagram which was worn for the “Math religion”
b. Father of Geometry was Euclid
i. His books are the only ones that have survived
c. Father of Medicine was Hippocrates
i. Hippocratic Oath
ii. Theurgy movement of the gods/divine
1. Idea that medicine & religion were mixed
2. They never sought a natural cure, they always looked for a supernatural cure EX: Pretty woman who had a stomach ache was because Athena was jealous
iii. Hippocrates was the 1st to DENY theurgy and 1st to suggest natural cures rather than supernatural
iv. He invented the open-air hospital he put the hospitals on a hill with lots of sunshine. The people got better, but NOT because of their knowledge of germs
v. As a result of open-air hospital, the life expectancy rose from mid 30s 80s, but only for this brief period of 150 years. The Roman empire came around for approximately 1000 years and the life expectancy went back down to 50s
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)