The Radical Academy Discussion Forum
Philosophy, Politics, and the Human Condition
|
||
| Search For Similar Forums · Return to Website | ||
 First |
 Prev |
 Reply |
 Home |
Next  |
Last  |
| Viewing Page 1 of 1 (Total Posts: 2) |
| Author | Comment |
Kevin
 Aug 20, 07 - 9:15 PM |
Looking closer at Socrates "square" (Part I)
EVERY man is wiser TS (false) vs. No man is wiser TS (TRUE) C N O O N I T T R C A I D A I R C T T N I O O C N SOME man is wiser TS(false)& SOME man is NOT wiser TS(TRUE) Looking closer at the Socratic "square" we can see that according to a particular Delphic Oracle, it was TRUE to say that "No man is wiser than Socrates". So the CONTRARY proposition (Every man is wiser than Socrates.) must be FALSE and --- again, according to the Delphic Oracle --- the respective subcontrary propositions must be asserted to be TRUE and FALSE because of THE LAW OF THOUGHT --- True propositions contradict and are contradicted-by false propositions. But Socrates couldn't and didn't believe that particular oracle concerning himself BECAUSE of the more general oracle WRITTEN IN STONE at Delphi which reads, in effect WISDOM IS TO KNOW THYSELF. Thus his question "What is the god's riddle?" And "Thyself" to any ancient Greek is "thy soul" or as moderns tend to say. "thy mind" or "self". Some people take the GENERAL ORACLE to be a command, "KNOW THYSELF!" But the GENERAL ORACLE is a DEFINITION of WISDOM, rather than a "MORAL COMMAND". And since, as Aristotle points out at the outset of THE METAPHYSICS, "sight" helps us KNOW things, a rephrased proposition arguably follows... contd. KB |
|
Kevin
Aug 21st, 2007 - 12:37 AM |
Re: Looking closer at Socrates "square" (Part I)
PREVIOUSLY: But the GENERAL ORACLE is a DEFINITION of WISDOM, rather than a "MORAL COMMAND". And since, as Aristotle points out at the outset of THE METAPHYSICS, "sight" helps us KNOW things, a rephrased proposition arguably follows... ...and is very arguably also a "STRONG PROPOSITION" or "argument" to the effect that either (1) EVERY wise man is a KNOWER of his PSYCHE/mind OR (slightly differently) (2) Every wise person is a SEER of her PSYCHE/mind. So when/if you conclude as Socrates arguably did, that you DON'T SEE or DON'T KNOW your own mind (psyche; SELF), the inevitable SYLLOGISTIC inference is that YOU ARE NOT WISE, or put in the terms of Plato's translated APOLOGY --- "I am very CONSCIOUS TO MYSELF that I am NOT WISE. What is the god's riddle? For it is NOT legitimate for him to lie." And there is corroboration for the argument that Socrates strictly affirmed a "missing proposition" in THE APOLOGY to the effect that "I (Socrates) do NOT KNOW/see my own psyche". That corroboration comes in Plato's PHAEDRUS, quote, SOCRATES (to Phaedrus): Now I have no leisure for such enquiries (about Greek Myths KB); shall I tell you why? I must first KNOW MYSELF, as the DELPHIAN INSCRIPTION says; to be curious about that which is not my concern, while I am still in IGNORANCE OF MY OWN SELF, would be ridiculous. And therefore I bid farewell to all this; the common opinion is enough for me. For, as I was saying, I want to know not about this, but ABOUT MYSELF: Am I a monster more complicated and swollen with passion than the serpent Typho, or a creature of a gentler and simpler sort, to whom Nature has given a diviner and lowlier destiny? [Plato's PHAEDRUS; circa section "23O a" and forward] NOTE:- It is good to read different interpreter's somewhat different translations of identical passages, in Greek, for they become "richer" and, perhaps, more meaningful in one's own language. eg. In looking up the section number of Plato's Phaedrus (not appended to the quoted translation), I found both the Section # and a much "richer" translation of the same passage at the same time. But the meaning of both translations is unmistakable in terms of Socrates's assertion that he "does not KNOW his own psyche/mind" or "self". The above unmistakable proposition, put together with what Socrates describes as the "Delphic Inscription", as a DEFINITION, rather than as a "moral injunction" or "command" (which is exactly how Socrates refers to the INSCRIPTION in speaking with Phaedrus; Thus, arguably, the many modern interpretations of the Delphic Inscription as a "COMMAND" rather than as a DEFINITION) results in Socrates's SYLLOGISTIC-inference that he is NOT WISE (clearly asserted by Socrates in Plato's APOLOGY). People these days like to talk about living in a SCIENTIFIC civilization or culture and that the ancient Greeks lived in a "philosophical" culture, with only rudimentary SCIENCE/s. But Socrates went about his subsequent inquiries into the meaning of the "god's" particular oracle, and "riddle" which he didn't believe, in exactly the same way that scientists TEST allegedly "modern" SCIENTIFIC THEORIES, as follows: Socrates looked for a COUNTER-EXAMPLE to refute the particular "oracle" (one could say "theory") concerning Himself and tried to find an EXAMPLE of an individual who CONFORMED to the GENERAL THEORY of the Oracle at Delphi, WRITTEN IN STONE --- ie. some individual who was a genuine SEER/knower of his own Psyche, and, hence, WISER THAN SOCRATES and also in conformity with the General Oracle's DEFINITION of WHAT a wise human being was DEFINED to be. We know, at least according to Plato, that Socrates never found the "counter example" he sought, to, thereby, REFUTE that particular oracle concerning himself. The sought for "counter-example" would have been, according to Aristotle's "square" of the logical opposition of propositions (sentences) "SOME man is wiser than Socrates." (TRUE) That is the exact proposition which CONTRADICTS the particular oracle's proposition, which was, "NO man is wiser than Socrates." (TRUE) And if Aristotle teaches anything, he constantly teaches that CONTRADICTORY propositions are logically opposed as TRUE vs. FALSE propositions and NOT that they are "opposed" as TRUE "vs." TRUE propositions!!! Hence if it is true to say that "SOME MAN is wiser than Socrates" (TRUE) it is false to say that "NO man is wiser than Socrates." (FALSE) and vice versa. If it is true to say that "NO man is wiser than Socrates (TRUE) then it is false to say that "SOME man is wiser than Socrates (FALSE). That is the ESSENCE of what Aristotle's "square" teaches --- TRUE propositions CONTRADICT and are contradicted-by FALSE propositions. One is obliged to find what they consider to be true and false propositions by other methods than LOGIC. With Aristotle it was careful OBSERVATION. With some modern scientists it is EXPERIMENTS. ctd. KB |
| First |
Prev |
Reply |
Home |
Next |
Last |
bravenet.com