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?
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
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)