Intro To Philos
Intro To Philos PHI 001
Popular in Course
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
This 172 page Class Notes was uploaded by Marlee Kulas on Wednesday September 9, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to PHI 001 at University of California - Davis taught by Staff in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 22 views. For similar materials see /class/191927/phi-001-university-of-california-davis in PHIL-Philosophy at University of California - Davis.
Reviews for Intro To Philos
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 09/09/15
Russell s The Problems of Philosophy G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 The Problem of the External World 0 Descartes introduced the question of whether there exists an external world a physical world independent of one s own mind He used his alleged knowledge of the existence of God to answer in the af rma tive o Hume argued that philosophy could give no satisfactory proof of the external world s existence 0 Kant called the failure to prove that a physical world exists a scandal to philos ophy and tried to provide such a proof 0 In the twentieth century Bertrand Russell 18721970 made yet another pro posal for solving Descartes s problem Russell s approach was to argue that the existence of an external world is the best explanation of our sensory experience Perceptual Relativity o In the eighteenth century George Berkeley 16851753 had advanced skeptical arguments against the claim that we know an external world exists 0 One of his arguments appeals to the fact that all human senseperception is rela tive to the perceiver 0 Russell endorses Berkeley s premise He notes that even if there are external objects each of their properties would appear at least slightly differently to every perceiver since each one is situated differently relative to the object The alleged object has no single perceived color no single perceived shape no single perceived hardness and generally no single perceived quality 0 This raises two questions Are there mindindependently real objects at all If so what are their mindindependently real characteristics SenseData 0 We can say at the outset that perceived qualities are not real characteristics of objects 0 Instead they are private objects which Russell calls sensedata 0 So color shape hardness etc are nothing more than sensedata o Sensation is the experience of being immediately aware of sensedata 0 So the sensation of a color for example is the immediate awareness of a colored sensedatum Existential Doubts o The entire collection of physical objects such as tables if they exist is called by Russell matter 0 Berkeley tried to prove that matter does not exist given that all their alleged qualities are sensedata 0 His relativity argument at least succeeds in showing that we are not certain that matter exists 0 If we are not certain that matter exists we are not certain that other people exist 0 And as Hume argued in his Treatise we are not even certain that we ourselves existed in the past since our alleged memories reveal no more than do sense data 0 The only thing of which I am certain is that I am now perceiving sensedata Public Objects 0 Common sense tells us that there are public objects to which the sensedata comprising each person s point of view are related 0 But I cannot argue philosophically for the existence of material objects on this basis since I do not yet know that there are other persons with points of view 0 So the only evidence for the existence of public objects is the sensedata making up my private experience which does not seem to be a very promising start It is possible that there are no public objects but only my own dreams as Descartes had noted Simplicity 0 To determine what to believe I should compare the dream explanation of my sensedata with an explanation in terms of public objects 0 I then nd that an explanation in terms of public objects is simpler than the dream explanation Speci cally what is to be explained is the gaps I nd in my sensedata Sensedata appear for a time disappear and then very similar ones appear 0 If there are public objects I can easily account for the appearance of similar sensedata as being caused by the same object as caused the original sensedata 0 But if my sensedata are produced by dreaming I would have to have a more complex account in terms of some some hidden mechanism which produces them in a fairly regular fashion Explaining Behavior 0 Another way in which the publicobject explanation is simpler than the dream explanation has to do with patten1s of behavior of sensedata Apparent human behavior is betterexplained by appeal to public objects 0 If I have a body and there are other bodies which behave like mine then I can explain rather simply why sensedata of motions and articulate sounds are pro duced in those apparent bodies My body produces characteristic motions and sounds Other people have bodies Their motions and sounds associated with those bodies are associated with their minds 0 Moreover I can even explain why Ihave dreams on the basis of the behavior of public bodies Belief in Material Objects 0 We instinctively believe that material objects exist 0 The argument from the best explanation gives us a reason not to reject our in stinctive belief o It is the task of philosophy to provide a systematic explanation of the relation of material objects to sensedata o If a coherent explanation can be given then we have all the more reason to accept our instinctive belief o The more harmonious a system we can produce the less likely it is erroneous Space and Time 0 Our sensedata are ordered in a private space that differs from the public space of material objects 0 Our knowledge of physical space is based on systematic changes in the sense data in our private space 0 The explanation of changes in private space is that the sensedata are caused by objects whose position changes relative to our own body in public space 0 This explanation is supported by the way data for our different senses cohere with one another 0 It is also supported by the coherence of our own experience with the reports of other people 0 But we can only know of public space what is required to explain the behavior of our sensedata 0 Similar remarks apply to time Two Ways of Knowing o The simplest kind of knowledge is gained by acquaintance with what is known 0 We are only acquainted with sensedata so we cannot know material objects by acquaintance 0 We can also know about objects by description 0 The following is an example that assumes that the commonsense view of the world is correct I know that the tallest trees in the world exist without having been ac quainted with them I have been acquainted with a number of trees of varying heights and I know the general principle that if there are objects of varying heights some of them are tallest What We Know by Acquaintance 0 Besides sensedata we are acquainted with various features of our mental life 0 We are acquainted with memory states allow us to make a connection with our past 0 We have selfconsciousness which is acquaintance with ourselves as being ac quainted with sensedata memory states etc o More controversially Russell claims that we have acquaintance with universals such as Whiteness Diversity Brotherhood 0 We must be acquainted with universals in order to be able to use language com petently Knowing Material Objects by Description 0 Knowledge by description involves de nite descriptions of the form lhe soand so 0 Thus our knowledge by description is of the form lhe soandso is suchand such the F is G o If a sentence of the form lhe F is G is true then three conditions must be satis ed There exists something that is F Only one thing is F That thing is G o A special case of a description is one which links sensedata S to a single cause The cause of S o This kind of description can then be embedded in an explanatory sentence The cause of S is a material object 0 So Iknow material objects by descriptions of them as causes of my sensedata The Basis of Knowledge by Description 0 If I know that the cause of sensedata S is a physical object it is due to a combi nation of two factors My knowledge of S by acquaintance My knowledge on grounds of best explanation of a general principle which connects S with a cause 0 So knowledge by acquaintance of my sensedata is one basis of my knowledge by description that physical objects are their causes 0 Acquaintance alone does not yield knowledge of truths which is why knowledge of general principles is required for there to be knowledge by description Plato s Apology and Crito G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 Ethics and Political Philosophy 0 The second part of the course is a brief survey of important texts in the history of ethics and political philosophy 0 Ethics is a normative discipline which primarily concerns the evaluation of hu man behavior 0 Historically two broad questions are asked What makes a person a good or a bad person What makes a human action right or wrong 0 Closely connected with ethics is political philosophy which deals with such questions as How ought society to be organized What makes the actions of a society or of individuals just or unjust 0 These questions were asked by the ancient philosophers and remain of vital in terest today Ancient Ethics and Political Philosophy 0 The fundamental practical issue for the ancient philosophers was how to attain the good life 0 There were two main candidates as answers to that question Through virtue or excellence of character thought and action arete Through a state of either happiness eudaemonia or pleasure hedone 0 Generally it was thought that virtue and happiness are closely related while virtue and pleasure are not 0 If this is so then happiness and pleasure are two distinct kinds of states 0 The larger question was how individual virtue happiness or pleasure are related to norms such as justice and injustice that apply to society Socrates The Man of Virtue o The rst ancient philosopher to undertake a comprehensive investigation of virtue was Socrates o Socrates described his behavior as a response to a divine voice daemon within him and to an utterance by the Delphic Oracle 0 His philosophical goal was to seek the truth through the interrogation of people alleged to be wise 0 His practical goal was to teach that the each person should attain the best possible state of the soul which would entail being as virtuous as possible 0 According to Aristotle Socrates believed that our actions always aim at the best and fail to attain it only because we are ignorant of what the best is o Socrates s commitment to virtue was so strong that he accepted an unjust sen tence of death rather than escaping into exile The Sophists 0 Although Socrates tried to expose the pretensions to knowledge of everyone he came across he was especially hostile toward the Sophists o The Sophists were professional teachers of rhetoric whose aim was to train young people to debate in the political arena 0 One boast of the Sophists was that they could make the worse argument appear better than the better argument 0 Socrates charged that the Sophists trained their students to advance their own interests even by arguing for falsehoods o By promoting ignorance the Sophists promoted actions which are not aimed at what is best 0 In this way the in uence of the Sophists was to tuni people away from virtue The Priority of Virtue o In contrast to the Sophists Socrates tried to turn people toward virtue 0 His message was that one should care most strongly for the best possible state of the soul rather than for wealth or bodily pleasure o Wealth and other goods that a person pursues do not make the person virtuous when they are attained o Wealth does not bring about exellence but excellence makes wealth and every thing else good for men both individually and collectively Apology 30b 0 The virtuous person cannot be harmed as the only real harm is the loss of virtue An Injustice o Socrates was accused of crimes against the city of Athens convicted by a jury and sentenced to death 0 He regarded his conviction as wrongful as he thought he had proved that the charges against him were unfounded 0 He claimed that the only reason for his conviction was his own refusal to beg for the jury s mercy 0 Had he done so he would have brought shame on himself 0 In fact it was the jury that brought shame on itself by treating him unjustly o The jury would reap the consequences of its actions Socrates s followers would be emboldened to act against members of the Jilly The jury members would lose out on the opportunity to improve themselves with the help of Socrates o The second item is an example of the famous Socratic irony Death 0 Socrates faced death resolutely due to his belief that the virtuous person cannot be harmed 0 He proposed a dilemma which shows the harmlessness of death 0 Death is either A dreamless sleep or A passage to another life 0 A dreamless sleep is desirable not harmful o The virtuous person who passes on to another life would nd justice there and would associate with other virtuous souls The Social Dimension of Virtue o Excellence of the soul seems to be an entirely personal matter 0 Socrates argues that the opinions of others are irrelevant to whether one is acting from virtue or not 0 The virtuous person cannot be harmed by the actions of others no matter what their opinion of him o The only harm another can do is to lead one away from virtue o In looking to others for guidance in action one should look to those who have knowledge of virtue By analogy an athlete should look for guidance from a trainer or a physi cian o What should guide our actions is not how nonvirtuous people think we should behave but whether the actions themselves are right or wrong just or unjust Unjust Actions 0 Suppose someone or some group of people has behaved unjustly toward a per son A case in point is Socrates s conviction and deathsentence o The injustice of the act does not justify an unjust act in return Socrates should not avoid death by escape and exile if such behavior would be unjust o In general no consequences of an unjust action however favorable make it acceptable to perform it 0 So the issue facing Socrates is whether avoiding the death penalty by escape is indeed unjust Bad Consequences o Socrates argues in the speci c case of his escape that the consequences would not in fact be favorable His friends will be put into danger by helping him escape He will be received as an enemy of the law If he nds a lawless state that would accept him his life would not be worth living there His conviction would be vindicated as his escape would prove that he was not teaching virtue He would be disgraced by acting in a cowardly way 0 On the other hand no real harm will be done if he does not escape As a virtuous person he cannot be harmed No harm would come to his family members as friends would look after them Justice and Agreement 0 But as stated above the consequences of his escape should not be the basis of his decision 0 The question is whether to escape is to act unjustly o Socrates argues that to escape would be to violate a just agreement which is always unjust o The agreement in his case is to follow the laws of the city 0 So even if the laws are executed in an unjust way they must still be followed The Social Contract U 00 o Socrates did not make an explicit agreement with the city of Athens to obey its laws 0 His agreement was a tacit one which is now called a social contract He stayed in the city Yet he could have left at any time with all his property 0 Moreover he received bene ts from his tacit agreement with the city eg his education 0 It was also in his power to argue for better laws so the laws of the city are not oppressive in any way rates and Modern Political Thought 0 Social contract theories have been used by many modern philosophers to justify the application of laws to members of society 0 In the midtwentieth century such thinkers as Ghandi and King have claimed that it is just to disobey unjust laws or laws that are enforced unjustly 0 There may be a way to reconcile this attitude with Socrates s argument that it is unjust to disobey the laws of the city 0 The indigenous people of India and the AfricanAmericans were not related to the laws in the same way Socrates was The laws were oppressive in that these people were in no position to in u ence the legislative process 0 The difference in the two situations can be made vivid by considering whether a slave in ancient Athens was party to any kind of social contract Aristotle s Categories and Physics G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 Aristotle as Metaphysician o Plato s greatest student was Aristotle 384322 BC 0 In metaphysics Aristotle rejected Plato s theory of forms and proposed his own theory of what makes things the kind of things they are 0 Most importantly he rejected Plato s claim that forms are distinct from the things that share in them 0 As a result Aristotle gave natural science a central role in his philosophy and linked his metaphysics closely to the investigation of nature 0 Aristotle was the rst practitioner of logic which also had a deep in uence on his metaphysical theory 0 In this segment we will investigate two of Aristotle works Categories logic Physics natural science Plato s Account of Kinds o Plato s general account of how a thing is of a kind Form causes Quality in Thing 0 An example of how a thing some wine in a goblet is of a kind cold Coldness itself causes The wine s coldness in The wine Aristotle s Basic Account of Kinds o Aristotle s general account of how a thing is of a kind Something said of Being in Subject 0 So in the above example Cold said of The wine s cold temperature in The wine 0 We will go through the new features of Aristotle s account onebyone In a Subject 0 While Plato said that a quality is in a subject Aristotle says that a being is in a subject because beings other than qualities can be in a subject including Quality white Quantity two feet long Relative larger Where in the Lyceum When yesterday Being in a position sitting Having has shoes on Acting on cutting Being acted on being cut 0 A being which is in a subject Is not part of the subject as a hand is part of a man Cannot exist separately from the subject it is in Said ofa Subject 0 We discover from grammar what is said of or predicated of a subject 0 The general schema for being said of a subject is x some verb 0 The standard case is where we say something of a subject because of what is in it A cold temperature is in the Wine so we say The Wine is cold And cold is said of the Wine 0 We may also say something about What is said of something Man is said of Socrates Man is an animal So animal is said of man And animal is also said of Socrates Genus and Species 0 We may schematize the last example Animal said of Man said of Socrates s rationality and locomotion in Socrates 0 Man can be said of many individual things and it Will be called a species 0 Animal can be said of many species and it Will be called a genus 0 Species and genera are distinguished from other species and genera respectively by differentia 0 Man is an animal Which is different from all other animals by being rational so rationality is the differentiating feature of man Substance 0 Substance is that Which is not in a subject 0 Thus substance applies to Individual Socrates Species man Genus animal 0 What is also not said of any subject is primary substance individual things 0 The species or genera said of a primary subject are secondary substance 0 Other things said of a primary substance are not substance because they do not reveal What it is 0 Since all other things are either in or said of primary substance none would exist Without primary substance Features of Substance o Substances seem to be thises and primary substances certainly are thises This is Socrates o Substances have no contraries and only individual substances can receive con traries A pale color can never become dark But Socrates can be pale and become dark 0 Substance does not admit of degrees Man is never more or less man 0 An individual substance has a nature which is an internal principle of change and stability The Nature of a Thing 0 The nature of a thing may be conceived in two ways As the matter that makes it up 6 The esh and bones of an animal As its form 6 The soul of an animal 0 The form is more the nature than is the matter 0 We call a thing the kind of thing it is when it actually has the form not when it potentially does What is potentially esh and bone is not an animal unless it acquires the form that makes it esh and bone How to Study Nature 0 The mathematician studies pure quantities o The student of nature studies matter and uses mathematics to understand math ematical coincidents of matter The student of astronomy studies the shapes of the heavenly bodies eg whether they are spherical 0 Form must also be studied by the student of nature just as it is studied by the craftsman o In the crafts we study the means that bring about certain ends and by analogy the study of nature will concern means and ends Descartes s Meditations on First Philosophy G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 The Dawn of Modern Philosophy 0 Modern philosophy appeared in the rst half of the seventeenth century 0 Several philosophers were trying to break from the scholastic philosophy of the late middle ages Galileo Galilei Italy Thomas Hobbes England Pierre Gassendi France Marin Mersenne France Rene Descartes France 0 Descartes is considered by some to be the father of modern philosophy 0 He developed a mathematicallybased philosophy of nature 0 But he tried to shield it from criticism of the Catholic Church by showing how it could actually promote the Christian faith Early Work of Descartes 0 As a young man Descartes was introduced by the Dutchman lsaac Beekman to the application of mathematics to physical phenomena 0 He wrote a book on physics The World which he withheld from publication upon learning of the condemnation of Galileo for claiming that the earth moves 0 He also wrote an un nished book Rules for the Direction of the Mind in which he tried to devise a universal method for discovering the truth 0 Most generally the method requires three steps To break down the problem into it simplest components To understand those components fully through a clear intuition of them To reassemble the components so that the whole can be fully understood Cartesian Metaphysics and Epistemology o Descartes s goal in metaphysics was threefold To give an account of physical reality according to which it is best under stood mathematically To separate the soul from the body which would allow for immortality To prove the existence of God and in turn appeal to God s properties in support of mathematical natural science 0 To support his metaphysics Descartes defended a theory of knowledge episte mology o Descartes s theory is rationalist The role of the senses is only to provide practically useful information Reason is the basis of our knowledge of metaphysical truths as well as of the mathematical structure of nature 0 Descartes rejected the widelyheld Aristotelian view that there is nothing in the intellect which is not rst in the senses Preconceptions 0 According to Descartes metaphysicians and natural scientists are in the grip of preconceptions which they acquired in their youth 0 These preconceptions are derived from sensory experience 0 The most general preconception is that physical objects are as they appear to the senses to be 0 Descartes s goal was to overthrow his natural preconceptions and to establish metaphysics and natural science on a new basis 0 The key to doing this is to nd truths that are selfevident to reason and not merely beliefs held over from his irrational youth Sweeping Preconceptions Away 0 In the Meditations Descartes undertakes the task of clearing all preconceptions from his mind 0 To do this he considers several classes of propositions and determines whether propositions of that kind are subject to any doubt whatsoever 0 If they are subject to doubt he will treat them as being false though only on a provisional basis o In the appended Objections and Replies to the Meditations he compares this process of puri cation with that of dumping out a barrel of apples in order to nd any rotten ones 0 The good apples can be returned once the rotten ones have been removed Doubts About Objects of SensePerception 0 Opinions about small or distant objects formed through senseperception are fre quently in error A square tower in the distance looks round 0 Opinions about nearby things are dubious because dream states are frequently confused with waking states It appears to me that I am sitting fully clothed by the re when in fact I am in bed undressed 0 Even if we doubt whether we are awake or asleep at a given time and hence doubt our opinions about what surrounds us it still seems that there would have to be waking states to provide material for our dreams More Simple and Universal Things 0 It also appears that if we are to have dream images the images must be composed of more simple and universal components Corporeal nature in general The extension dimensionality of corporeal things The shape of extended corporeal things The size of extended corporeal things The place where corporeal things exist The time at which corporeal things exist 0 Apart from the rst these simple and universal components of our images are objects of mathematics 0 So it seems that numbers and geometrical objects are required for us to have images A Deceiving God 0 Thus far we have no reason to doubt that there is a world of bodies or to doubt simple mathematical facts 0 But Descartes has a preconception that he has been made by a God and it may be that his maker allows us to be deceived in these matters There is no corporeal world although there appears to be one My methods for forming opinions about simple mathematical propositions eg adding numbers always go wrong 0 It may be objected that God would not allow me to be deceived in this way because he is supremely good 0 But if there is a God he allows us to be deceived in some cases so why not in all 0 And we were not made by God it is more likely that we are very imperfect so as to be deceived all the time I Must Exist in Order to Doubt 0 At this point Descartes is committed by his method to withhold his assent from his beliefs about the corporeal world as well as about more simple and universal things 0 Still he nds something from which he cannot withhold his assent I must exist if I am doubting Augustine 0 Not even God can bring it about that I am nothing when Ithink that I am some thing Now that something indubitable has nally been discovered Descartes can begin the task of recovering some of his old opinions and forming new ones I Am a Thinking Thing 0 The I whose existence survives all doubt may be understood as A corporeal thing A drinking thing 0 Because he is taking it as false that he has a body since he supposes that no body exists he can only consider himself as a thinking thing 0 Many of the characteristics of a thinking thing are prerequisites of undertaking his current project Doubting Understanding Af rmingDenying WillingRefusing Rounding Out the Mind 0 What is required in order to carry out the project of doubt has two components An intellectual component consisting of understanding concepts and propo sitions An nonintellectual volitional component a will which can af rm or deny the propositions entertained by the understanding The mind has two additional powers Imagining or forming images that seem to correspond to features of bodies Sensing or seeming to see hear feel smell and taste Note that sensing and imagining do not require the existence in reality of bodies The generic term thinking applies to understanding will imagination and senseperception Understanding versus Sense and Imagination At the end of the Second Meditation Descartes grants for the time being that corporeal things exist and are known through the use of the senses and the imag ination Then he tries to show that corporeal things are known better through the under standing He uses as an example a fresh piece of wax from a beehive that is subsequently heated The senses reveal constant change while the imagination cannot grasp the in nitely many changes the wax might undergo But the understanding grasps the constant features of the wax Extension Flexibility Mutability Clear and Distinct Perception o In the Third Meditation Descartes resumes the main thread of the discussion 0 He now knows that he himself exists when thinking that he is a thinking thing and what thinking is 0 His next step is to discover what it is to know these things 0 The feature of his understanding of them that seems to yield this knowledge is the clarity and distinctness of his perception of them 0 So he adopts as a general rule that CampD Whatever I perceive very clearly and very distinctly is true 0 Descartes notes that when he perceives things in this way he cannot help but believe they are true whatever doubts about them he might have entertained The Light of Nature 0 Another way to describe the way in which Descartes knows what he does thus far is that it is revealed by the light of nature 0 Traditionally the light of nature means reason and it is distinguished from the supernatural light the light of faith 0 Anything x that is known by the light of nature cannot be doubted There is nothing else in Descartes that he could trust as much and that could teach him that x is not true 0 What is known by the light of nature is sharply distinguished from what is taught to him by nature To be taught by nature is to have a blind spontaneous impulse to believe that what is presented to the mind is true 0 Descartes s rationalist project is to accept as scienti c knowledge only what is revealed by the light of nature Metaphysical Doubt 0 Descartes notes that using CampD as a criterion of truth has an important limita tion 0 When he is not perceiving the things themselves eg the steps of a geometrical proof doubt can creep into his mind 0 Speci cally he can entertain the possibility that God might have made him so as to be deceived about the simplest things o This doubt is very tenuous and metaphysical but it must be dispelled if he is to be completely certain of those things 0 To remove the doubt he must determine Whether God exists and Whether God could be a deceiver Proving the Existence of Other Things 0 Thus far the only thing Descartes can prove to exist is himself 0 He is taught by nature that he has ideas Which resemble other things They seem to be ideas of other things because they arise against his Will We naturally assume that the ideas resemble physical objects Which are their cause 0 But What has been taught by nature can be deceptive The ideas might be produced by myself and not by other things Many of my ideas do not resemble What I think causes them the sun looks the size of a dime 0 We must tuni to the light of nature to prove that other things exist Degrees of Reality 0 The formal reality of a thing is is existence independent of thought 0 Our ideas represent beings as having a certain degree of reality 0 Descartes says that the represented beings have objective reality to that degree The idea of a substance is more real objectively than that of an accident The idea of an in nite substance is more real objectively than that of a nite substance 0 Correspondingly we can distinguish degrees of formal reality in What our ideas purport to represent What Else is There 0 As a thinking thing With thoughts that depend on me I am a formally real sub stance I am not the cause of myself If I had caused my own existence I would have made myself perfect 0 As a nite substance I have enough formal reality to be the cause of an idea of any nite substance besides myself Of other human minds Of angels Of physical objects 0 So my having the idea of a nite substance other than myself does not prove that such a nite substance exists 0 I do not have enough formal reality to be the cause of God a supreme in nite being which created all other things First Proof of God s Existence 0 Descartes s attempt to prove that God exists Meditation Three combines the two main features of the proofs of Anselm and Aquinas It moves from having an idea of God to God s existence Anselm The inference is from the idea as effect to God as cause of the idea Aquinas o The idea of God has in nite objective reality 0 Descartes claims that it is known by the light of nature that The cause of an idea with a given degree of objective reality must have at least as high a degree of formal reality 0 Hence the idea of an in nite being must be caused by a being whose degree of formal reality is appropriately great an in nite reality 0 Moreover God causes the existence of anything that has such an idea and God created me with an innate idea of him God Is No Deceiver o The idea of God is that of a perfect being 0 A perfect being is incapable of deception so God did not make me so as to be systematically deceived 0 God gave me a way of infallibly avoiding error so long as I use it properly 0 I fall into error because I have an in nite will which can accept anything as true including what is beyond the limits of my understanding 0 When I fall into error it is no fault of God s I should thank God for giving me even a limited understanding Although God could have made me errorfree God made me in a way he knew is best I am able to avoid error by restraining my judgment within the limits of my intellect Freedom of the Will 0 Willing is the ability to do or not do the same thing To af rm or deny To pursue or to shun 0 When an action is proposed to the will it is free insofar as we sense that it is determined by no extenial force 0 I sense that what appears to me as good and true is not determined by an external force 0 Thus the more inclined one is to choose on the basis of what appears to be good and true the more free one is o If one were to understand fully what is good and true then one would freely choose it without deliberation 0 Conversely indifference to the outcome of choice is the lowest grade of freedom The Nature of External Objects o In order to determine whether other objects besides God exist extenial to one s mind one would do well to understand what clear ideas one has of them 0 We have clear ideas of two continuous quantities Extension Duration 0 Using these quantities we can understand Shapes Positions Motion 0 Geometry demonstrates that ideas of extended enduring things represent true and immutable natures 0 Although Descartes does not state the conclusion here the point of this claim is that things in the physical world share in these natures and hence are best studied by quantitative methods Second Proof of God s Existence 0 Descartes s second proof of God s existence is a reformulation of Anselm s on tological proo I have a clear and distinct perception of a supremely perfect being I cannot remove or change any features of this idea For any idea x that y has if none of its features may be removed or changed then x is an image for y of a true and immutable nature P EQ 4 So the idea of a supremely perfect being is an image for me of a true and immutable nature 123 5 I perceive clearly and distinctly that existence belongs to the nature of a supremely perfect being So I perceive clearly and distinctly that a supremely perfect being exists 0 7 Whatever I perceive clearly and distinctly is true mq So a supremely perfect being exists 67 So God exists 8 0 Dispelling Metaphysical Doubt 0 In Meditation Three Descartes was left with a slight metaphysical doubt about the truth of what he was not presently clearly and distinctly perceiving o The basis of the doubt was the possibility that he was constituted by nature so as to be wrong about things he thought he perceived most evidently 0 Now that God has been proved to exist and to have made him and it has been proved that God is no deceiver there is no further basis for such doubt 0 He can now be assured at all times that he cannot be wrong about what he per ceives clearly and distinctly o The certainty and truth of every science depends on knowledge of God The Cartesian Circle 0 Two of the authors in the Objections and Replies raised the charge that Descartes s argument is circular Knowledge of God s existence and veracity is required to validate the truth of clear and distinct perceptions God s existence and veracity are demonstrated on the basis of the truth of clear and distinct perceptions o Descartes s defense is that the truth of clear and distinct perceptions needs to be validated only when one is not currently having them 0 The proof of God s existence depends on present clear and distinct perceptions whose truth is selfevident at the time and which thus do not need to be validated Understanding Imagination and Sense 0 In Meditation Two Descartes concluded that he is a being who understands and also imagines and senses o In Meditation Six he asserts the priority of understanding over imagination and sense I can understand without imagining or sensing But imagining and sensing require an act of the understanding 0 So the essence of the mind is to understand Restoring External Objects o Descartes is nally in a position to restore his suspended opinion that material objects exist 0 I have ideas of sensible things which require some agent to cause their existence 0 I am not the cause of these ideas since no act of the understanding is suf cient to bring them about 0 So the cause of the ideas is something else Material things An immaterial spirit such as God or an angel 0 If an immaterial spirit were the cause of my idea then my great natural inclinca tion to believe that material things are their cause would be a deception 0 Since God is no deceiver my natural inclination is correct and extenial objects exist Mind and Body 0 Descartes attempts to demonstrate that mind and body are distinct dualism l I can conceive my mind as existing even if no body exists Meditation Two 2 Whatever I can conceive as not existing together are not the same thing 3 So my mind is not the same as any body 12 11 0 Nonetheless Descartes claimed that his mind is so closely united with a body that together they make up one thing 0 He is able to detect when the body has needs such as to eat or to drink 0 This is due to sensory perceptions of his body which are confused ways of think ing and purely intellectual acts of understanding what his bodies needs are Misleading Feelings o The purpose of senseperception is to indicate what objects are to be sought and which are to be avoided 0 Sometimes we get misleading signals from our body such as to drink when it would be harmful o This is not a deception on the part of God who created the mindbody union 0 Rather it is a feature of the complexity of the body whose signals can be dis torted on their path to the brain 0 Finally we are equipped to distinguish waking states from dreams The input of all of the senses is consistent with what is remembered and what is understood Nietzsche G J Mattey Winter 2008 Philosophy 151 Nietzsche s Literary Output 0 Nietzsche was trained in classical philology or what we would now call clas sics 0 His rst published work The Birth of Tragedy 1872 attempted to explain Greek art and more generally Greek culture in a way that gives insight into the state of German culture 0 His 1878 book Human AllTooHuman initiated a steady stream of books that were at once philosophical psychological historical and cultural in their con tent These works were written in several literary forms including essays aphorisms and poetry 0 In 1901 his sister published as The Will to Power a collection of his notes from 1883 to 18 8 8 0 She published in 1908 his autobiography Ecce Homo Nietzsche and Christianity 0 Like Marx and Schopenauer Nietzsche rejected Christianity 0 Although his views on Christianity appear here and there throughout his philo sophical works they are systematically developed in The AntiChrist which was published in 1895 after he had become insane Nietzsche s criticisms of Christianity were not directed at Jesus but rather at the religion created by his followers In truth there was only one Christian and he died on the cross The Anti Christ Section 39 0 Nietzsche viewed Christianity as a sociocultural phenomenon 0 His chief criticism was that it has a debilitating effect on the people who are under its sway The Good and the Bad 0 The opening sections of The AntiChrist develop Nietzsche s own point of view from which he criticized Christianity 0 The main thesis is that the central ethical categories of good and bad must be understood in terms of their relation to power a central Nietzschean category 0 The good for man is what heightens his powers 0 The bad for man is what has its origin in weakness 0 Happiness is directly tied to goodness Happiness is the feeling that power is growing is overcoming resistance 0 Thus happiness is not to be found in contentedness peace or moraline virtue o The central problem with Christianity is that it promotes the bad through its pity for failures and for the weak The Higher Type and the Sick Human Animal 0 One of the most characteristic of Nietzsche s doctrines is that some humans are higher types while nearly everyone is a member of the herd o The goal of humans ought to be to create conditions which promote the appear ance of higher types 0 The higher type would be worthier of life and more certain of a future 0 In the past instances of the higher type have appeared often on the scene but only accidentally and not as the result of conditions promoting their appearance 0 These higher types have been dreaded by the masses 0 The product of this dread was the promotion of a lower type the sick human animal 0 This domesticated beast is the Christian The Overman o The higher type that sometimes accidentally appears is in relation to the whole of humanity an overman bermensch o The appearance of the overman is possible in all ages 0 In some cases there have been groups of overmen whole families tribes or people 0 But modeni society does not promote the development of these stronger groups o The modem notion of progress is a false idea in that it leads away from what should be the goal which is to create conditions favorable to the overman 0 Indeed Europeans of the Renaissance 300 years earlier was vastly greater in value than the Europeans of the late nineteenth century The Strong Spirit as Evil 0 Christianity has waged a deadly war against the overman o The villi ed moral quality evil is precisely the quality of the overman o The basic instincts of those strong in spirit are regarded as reprehensible and the spirited person himself is called a reprobate 0 Conversely whatever opposes the instinct of the overman is made into an ideal of moral virtue 0 Thus the strong spirits are fooled into thinking that their instincts are sinful and erroneous o The most pitiful example is Blaise Pascal who believed his reason was cor rupted by original sin when it was really conupted by his Christianity Christian Corruption as Decedance o The classi cation of the in uence of Christianity as conuption is not intended to be a moral condemnation 0 Nietzsche claims that his description of the conuption of humanity is moraline free 0 Indeed he has his strongest experience of this corruption in those who most aspire to be virtuous or godly o The conuption by Christianity is a tendency to decay decadence o It occurs when people lose their instincts toward growth and power to their own disadvantage Where the will to power is lacking there is decline 0 The values of Christianity are thus values of decadence which are nihilistic The Christian Virtue of Pity o The alleged source of all virtues in Christianity is pity 0 Rather than enhancing our instincts toward power pity depresses them 0 Pity is directed at those who suffer but instead of alleviating suffering pity spreads it further 0 A more important consideration is that pity crosses the law of development which is the law of selection 0 It gives life a gloomy aspect by preserving the weak who are really ripe for destruction 0 Pity is a nihilistic value because it turns against the lifeaf rming will to power 0 It hides the fact that it is directed at nothingness by calling it the beyond God Nirvana etc How to Overcome Pity o Schopenhauer was hostile to life and so he quite consistently made pity a virtue o The modern literary and artistic trends throughout Europe from Wagner to Tol stoy are symptomatic of a pathological and dangerous accumulation of pity o Aristotle on the other hand took pity to be dangerous something to be purged through tragedy o The remedy is to look at pity like a sore that must be punctured and made to burst o It is up to the philosophers to wield the knife and become physicians to the unhealthy modern society whose most unhealthy component is Christian pity Christ and Christianity 0 The intervening sections of The Anti Christ develop the criticism of Christianity 0 Much of it involves a theory of Nietzsche s that the message of the historical Jesus was distorted by his followers led by Saint Paul after his death 0 The true message of Jesus was to nd happiness in one s own heart 0 But his death led his followers to seek revenge by making him into a God and making themselves into God s agents 0 They succeeded in destroying the noble GrecoRoman culture as well as the Islamic and Renaissance cultures 0 In each case the noble value of lifeaf rmation was turned into evil and re placed by a cult of weakness The Case Against Christianity 0 The nal section of The Anti Christ contains a condemnation of Christianity as being the greatest conceivable corruption 0 It has inverted all values turning everything that is lifeaf rming into something to be reviled 0 Christianity claims to be humanitarian and to alleviate the distress of life 0 But instead it perpetuates distress It convinces everyone that they are sinners It promotes ressentiment through the falsehood that everyone is equal in the eyes of God 0 Far from being humanitarian Christianity violates humanity by opposing its best instincts 0 Christianity is parasitic in that its only aim is to drain the life out of humanity o The only way to overcome it is to revaluate all values Twilight 0fthe Idols o The posthumouslypublished Twilight of the Idols consists of a number of sec tions which are arranged in no apparent order 0 Its name is a pun on the name of Wagner s opera Twilight of the Gods o A section entitled Maxims and Arrows consists of fortyfour aphorismsivery short and often witty comments themselves very loosly connected with one an other Other sections are in the form of short essays 0 Another section recounts the history of an error in six steps the nal one being the truth that Nietzsche thought he had discovered 0 Together they give as a fairly comprehensive picture of Nietzsche s mature thought Nietzsche s Portrait of Himself 0 In Maxims and Arrows we get some insight as to how Nietzsche viewed him self and his work 0 He described himself as a posthumous man someone who is not understood in his own time and in fact never understood His failure to be understood is the basis of his authority o The formula of his happiness is said to be A Yes a No a straight line a goal 0 Given that he has his own why of life it does not matter how he lives 0 He describes himself at times as a psychologist and states that to be successful as a psychologist he must tuni his eyes away from himself 0 He professes mistrust for anyone who would build a philosophical system stat ing that anyone with the will to create a system is lacking in integrity The Problem of Socrates o In The Problem of Socrates Nietzsche advances the thesis that the import of the teaching of Socrates has been misunderstood through the ages 0 Socrates advanced the cause of morality and rationality 0 His wisdom has been accepted through the ages by other sages o This consensus has been taken to be a sign of the truth of Socrates s teachings 0 But Nietzsche argues that the consensus has a quite different meaning 0 It is accounted for by the fact that the sages share a common psychological type with Socrates o The type is that of being sick and therefore hostile toward life against which they wield morality and rationality as weapons Placing a Value on Life 0 The judgment of the sages that life is no good was a necessary product of their psychological and physiological condition 0 Through his study of Greek tragedy Nietzsche had come to the conclusion that Socrates and Plato were symptoms of the degeneration of Greek culture types of decline 0 He generalized this observation to the later sages who were in agreement with them 0 His own view is that the value of life cannot be estimated Not by living people who have a stake in the outcome Not be the dead for they make no estimations o The fact that the sages considered the value of life to be a problem constitutes an objection to them 0 It shows that the very people who are revered for their wisdom are in fact not wise at all The Decadence of Socrates 0 Greek culture placed great value on beauty and Socrates was an ugly person 0 As such Socrates was already in opposition to Greek values 0 Indeed Socrates s ugliness suggests he was a criminal type which is consistent with his admission that he harbors the worst of vices 0 There are other indications of Socrates s decadence His overdeveloped logical faculty His sarcasm in debate His hallucinations of a god who was giving him instructions 0 Socrates s antiGreek decadence led to his equation reason 2 virtue happiness 0 This equation opposes all the instincts of the Greeks who had come before him especially the distance between the nobility and the base The Practice of Dialectic o Socrates was a practitioner of dialectic critically demanding reasons to justify any claim that was put forward 0 In preSocratic Greek culture the giving of reasons was considered bad manners because it implies dishonesty in what is said 0 The noble person gives commands and does not take seriously anyone who asks him for reason 0 It must be explained why Socrates was taken seriously 0 He resorted to dialectic which gives rise to mistrust and has only a temporary effect because that was the only weapon with which he could get revenge 0 He was able to turn the tables on the noblility he questioned leaving it to them to prove that they are not fools Why Socrates Was Taken Seriously 0 Since Socrates s practice of dialectic was repellant to his victims it remains to be explained why they allowed themselves to be rendered powerless by it 0 One reason is that he had invented a new kind of contest that appealed to the Greek taste for tests of skill o The deeper reason is that Greek culture was becoming degenerate like him with instincts running wild o Socrates offered a means of controlling those instinctsia way that allowed for selfmastery o In this way he offered a cure for the sickness the only way to avoid perishing was to become absurdly rational Thus rationality was made a virtue which brings happiness by supressing the dark appetites with a permanent daylight 0 But rationality is no cure being instead another form of decadence of disease Reason in Philosophy 0 The section entitled Reason in Philosophy contains an attack on the ratio nalism that characterizes most of Westeni philosophy 0 This rationalism traf cs in lifeless concepts and forever seeks the being that excludes becoming Unable to nd being it blames the senses for presenting a world of mere ap pearances o It also attempts to begin its investigations with the most abstract concepts which are considered higher and are more highly valued o This tendency shows up in the philosophy of the Greeks the Indians and the Christians Nietzsche criticizes these rationalist methods and advocates the primacy of ap pearances over being ConceptMummies o Philosophers are idiosyncratic in that they are opposed to anything temporal that involves becoming 0 They believe that they are showing respect for a subject when they treat it as something eternal 0 But in reality they are only draining the life out of whatever they dehistoricize turning living concepts into conceptmummies They search for being which they oppose absolutely to becoming but it eludes their grasp o Desparate for something to blame they charge the senses with being deceptive and hiding the true world 0 They particularly despise the the body that whose end the senses serve and which behaves as if it were real The Apparent and True Worlds 0 A philosopher who embraced the senses and becoming in the face of the tendency of rationalism is Heraclitus 0 He did think that the senses are deceptive but only because they present objects as being relatively permanent while all things in reality are in ux 0 Nietzsche claims against Heraclitus and the Eleatic defenders of being that the senses are not deceptive at all 0 Any claim to permanence substance thinghood etc in the world is based on an interpretation of what the senses present 0 The senses present the apparent world as it is with its becoming passing away and in general change 0 Nietzsche contends that real product of the deception of reason is the true world of which the apparent world is supposed to be a distortion Real Science and PseudoScience o The senses are magni cent instruments of observation The nose is more sensitive than a spectroscope yet it has not been taken seriously by philosophers 0 Science is fruitful only to the extent that it accepts the testimony of the senses extend their reach and think through them 0 Wouldbe sciences that disregard the senses falsify the world Metaphysics Theology Psychology Epistemology o The formal sciences of logic and mathematics do not deal with reality at all Logic is merely a system of conventions for using signs Mathematics is merely applied logic How the Philosophers Invented God 0 A second idiosyncrasy of philosophers confuses the last with the rst 0 The rationalist philosophers begin with the highest concepts when they would be at the end if they could be reached at all The good The true The perfect 0 Since being is static for these philosophers the highest concepts could not have emerged from the lower ones 0 Because they cannot come to be they must be treated as causes in themselves 0 Since these highest concepts must conform perfectly with one another they are all located in a single being the most real being God 0 The human race has paid dearly for this webspinning by the philosophers The In uence of Language on Our Thinking 0 Nietzsche diagnoses the cause of the rationalist bias in favor of thinghood to the origins of language 0 Language originated when psychology was in its most rudimentary form There is everywhere a doer and a doing The doer is the Ego and the cause is will 0 This initial notion of an ego is generalized to that of substance which is the origin of the concept thing 0 Philosophers later found that the categories of thinghood can be handled with security and so they made them a p ori since experience contradicts them 0 The nal result of the error was the claim that because we have reasons humans must belong in the divine realm of being 0 I am afraid we are not rid of God because we still have faith in grammar Summary of the Case Against Rationalism o The reasons that this world has been called apparent are in fact the reasons why that world is real while the existence of any other world cannot be demon strated o The so called true world is merely a moraloptical illusion and the criteria for its existence are in fact criteria for notbeing 10 o The only reason for favoring an otherworldly better life is as revenge against real life 0 The distinction between an apparent world and a true world is only a symbol of the decline of life 0 It may be thought that the artist s esteem for appearance over reality makes him decadent 0 But the appearance of the artist is just a selective and corrected duplication of the real world 0 The tragic artist in particular is Dionysian and says Yes to even the terrible in life The Origin and Demise of the True World 0 Nietzsche describes six steps from the embrace of the true world to its total rejection 0 The oldest form is the Platonic holding that the true world is his own world that of the virtuous man 0 The more subtle Christian form makes the true world only a promise for the virtuous o The Kantian twist was to make the true world unattainable but the thought of such a world a consolation o The positivist takes the true world to be unknown and therefore unconsoling o In its fth phase the concept of the true world is seen to be worthless and hence is rejected 0 The end of the error comes when the very distinction between a true and an apparen world is seen to be unsustainable With the true world we have also abolished the apparent one Morality as AntiNature o The section Morality as AntiNature summarizes Nietzsche s main positions regarding morality 0 He claims that morality is negative valuation of life in reaction to its decline 0 Orignally morality is an attempt to suppress the passions due to detrimental effects of being in uenced by them 0 Christianity tunis this into hatred of the passions as epitomized by the ascetics whose lives are devoted to dispassionate living 11 o Morality directed against the passions is antinatural because in the passions are found the natural instinct of life 0 Nietzsche calls himself an immoralist and describes a spiritualization of pas sions that would replace the established morality The War Against the Passions o The passions can be disastrous when they drag down their victim with the weight of stupidity o This led to a war against the passions themselves particularly within Christian ity If thy eye offend thee pluck it out J esus s Sermon on the Mount 0 But an attack on the passions which are the roots of life is a manifestation of hostility to life 0 This attack is needed only when the will is weak which is in tuni a form of degeneracy o The most extreme forms of hostility are not found in the impotent or even in the ascetics o It is found in the impossible ascetics those who are in dire need of becoming ascetics but are unable to do so The Spiritualization of Passion 0 At a time very much later than when they are disastrous the passions may be come spiritualized 0 Two kinds of spiritualizations are described Love which is the spiritualization of sensuality Hostility which is a profound appreciation of the value of having ene mies 0 Nietzsche does not describe the spiritualized passion of love but he does claim that it represents a great triumph over Christianity 0 He does describes in some detail hostility which is a value condemned by the moralists Every political institution needs enemies in order to build its own strength Intenially con ict is positive and spurs one toward a great life and away from the Christian peace of the soul Peace of the Soul 0 Although Nietzsche rejects the Christian ideal of peace of the soul as debili tating he allows it comes in many forms 0 He presents the list without further ado or prejudice but clearly some would be consistent with spiritualized passions as he understands them 0 Some apparently negative forms manifest defects in the passions The senile weakness of our will our cravings our vices Laziness persuaded by vanity to give itself moral airs 0 Others seem to describe spiritualized passions in their highest forms The state which follows a thorough satisfaction of our dominant passion the wellbeing of a rare repletion The expression of maturity and mastery in the midst of doing creating working and willing Natural and AntiNatural Morality o Naturalistic morality which is the only healthy kind prescribes actions that re move impediments to the ful llment of the instincts of life 0 Antinatural morality condemns all instincts of life whether overt or covert Nearly all moralities that have heretofore existed are antinatural 0 God is supposed to inspect the heart of every human being 0 Since the af rmation of the instincts of life are condemned God is the enemy of life 0 The kind of saint who would most delight God would be someone devoid of any lifeinstinct altogether 0 Life has come to an end where the kingdom of God begins The Value of Life 0 The condemnation of life by the living is a futile endeavor and is only symp tomatic of the life of the one who condemns o It is impossible for a living person to place an absolute value on life since this would require knowing life from within yet evaluating it from outside life 0 Nietzsche values life which means for him only that life itself inspires him to value life o The antinatural moralist also evaluates life from the standpoint of life 0 But his standpoint is one of decadence which inspires him to devalue life 0 Schopenhauer correctly understood morality as the negation of the will to life 0 This is the instinct of decadence which is a condemnation pronounced by the condemned Prescribing How to Live 0 The natural world contains a rich variety of ways of living 0 The antinatural moralists give a prescription of how one ought to live one s life 0 Even the most insigni cant person tells others that they ought to be different 0 Such a person is nothing more than a product of a causal chain and for him to command that others change their way of living is ridiculous o In fact for anyone to change themselves would require that everything be changed since all things are connected 0 The most consistent moralists would simply negate the world since this is what changing its course would entail o The immoralist is not negative but will understand comprehend and approve of the many ways of i e 0 Even the moralists have their useithey prepare the ground for the immoralists The Four Great Errors 0 The section entitled The Four Great Errors Nietzsche debunks four traditional doctrines regarding causality Confusing the effect for the cause Positing the mental as a cause Positing causes where there are none Positing the will as a free cause 0 He tries to show that these four errors lie at the basis of morality and religion 0 The essay ends with a short account of our doctrine the doctrine of we im moralists o This doctrine seeks to redeem the world by denying the existence of God The Error of Confusing Cause and Effect 0 The rst error is what Nietzsche calls the real corruption of reason 0 The error is that of mistaking the effect for the cause An example is a popular dietary regimen with little food intake that is sup posed to cause long life The proponent of the diet was predisposed to a long life because of his slow metabolism which caused him to eat little 0 Nietzsche states that there is no error more dangeous than this one o It is widespread both in ancient and modern times 0 It was originated by priests and originators of moral codes and is the basis of all religion and morality Behaving virtuously according to God s law is supposed to cause hap piness But those who are happy are predisposed to happiness because of their constitution which causes them to behave virtuously The True Nature of Moral Rules 0 The great original sin of reason is the injunction that one will be rewarded with happiness if and only if one obeys the rules of religion andor morality 0 An instance of Niezsche s revaluation of all values is the reversal of this for mu a o The wellturnedout human being is naturally happy and by necessity acts in the truly virtuous way that he does 0 The license and luxury that are condemned by religious and moral rules follow from the decadence of the people for whom the rules are made by the priests and moralists o The mistake made by the purveyors of morality is to condemn the decadent for being what they are 0 The bad is the outcome of degeneration while the good is the consequence of instinct 0 That morality is supposed to be dif cult is an objection to it The Error of a False Causality o The second error lies in the invention of a nonexistent inner causality 0 According to this error there are various candidates for the role of cause The will Motives Consciousness or the ego 0 People have always thought that they know what a cause is based on their alleged observation of their acts of willing as causes The causality of the will is taken to be given empirically o The antecedents of these acts of willing were said to be motives for which people are held to be responsible o The thoughts that make up the motives were held to be caused by the conscious ness spirit or ego subject This kind of cause is arrived at last and only as an afterbirth of the rst tag rom False Causes to a Fabricated World 0 None of the three alleged inner causes is a cause The will merely accompanies our actions Motives are also mere accompaniments of actions which more often hide their true cause than reveal them The ego has been exposed as being a mere ction 0 Since none of the three candidates for mental cause is in fact a cause there is no mental causality o In the creation of these false causes a false world of will or world of spirits has been created 0 For every deed a doer was invented to explain it 0 From the concept of ego is derived the concept of a thing which is also a fabrication So we can nd in things what we have put into them 0 From the concept of a thing we get the concepts of atom thing in itself and God The Error of Imaginary Causes W h It is often the case that in dreaming when a sensation occurs we invent a motive as a cause of that occurrence after the fact A faroff cannonshot is heard and we then ll in the time before it with a meaning to explain why the sensation occurred When awake we often invent imaginary causes to explain our feelings such as pressures tensions etc We only admit that we have had these feelings after we have invented a motive to explain them Memory aids in this process by recalling similar states and the causal interpreta tions placed on them We habitually come to accept the association between the states and their in vented causes This fact tends to hinder or even preclude the investigation of the real cause y We Invent Imaginary Causes uuuu Ttl fa for the invention of imaginary causes of our feelings Causal explanation eliminates any strangeness of the feeling by associating it with a familiar pattern The derivation from something known of a feeling of unknown origin relieves comforts and satis es us The feeling of pleasure we get from eliminating strangeness is taken to be a sign of the truth of the explanation This mode of explanation also allows us to block off the possibility of an unset tling strange cause of any unusual feeling After repeatedly giving a certain kind of cause one develops an explanatory system that becomes dominant in the sense that it precludes any other kind of cause Morality and Religion Are Based on Imaginary Causes Disagreeable feelings are explained through what is hostile to us Beings such as evil spirits or witches 7 Aspects of ourselves of which we disapprove such as sinfulnessf 0 These feelings are explained as being deserved punishment for things we should not have done Schopenhauer exposes the hostility to life of morality in generalizing this explanation every pain is just punishment for the fact that we are living human beings o Agreeable feelings are explained as effects of what is favorable to us Trust in God Consciousness of good deeds 0 But once again these explanations take the cause the feeling for the effect The Error of Free Will 0 We now know that free will is a foul arti ce of the theologians Its aim is to impart responsiblility for one s actions which can only be atoned through the priest o The search for responsibility generally is the result of wishing to judge and pun ish speci c actions 0 Thus the will was created by ancient priests go allow for themselves or God the right to punish 0 So that every act could be judged for its guilt every act had to have its origin located in consciousness Thus the error of free will is based on the rst three errors of causality o The modem immoralists are tying to cleanse the world of the concept of guilt o Naturally it is the priests and their concept of a moral worldorder that pose the greatest obstacle to this attempt to cure humanity of its sickness Humanity Has No Purpose 0 The philosophies of the past have tried to impart meaning to humanity by de scribing it as having been made to achieve some end 0 But there is nothing that gives humans the qualities they have Not God Not society Not ourselves as with Kant and perhaps Plato 0 There is no end for which humanity exists Not an ideal of humanity Not an ideal of happiness Not an ideal of morality o The very concept of an end is an invention 0 We are all necessarily connected parts of a whole whose value it is impossible to judge 0 To admit this fact is a great liberation and we redeem the world by denying God Oh the Genealogy of Morality 0 One of Nietzsche s most widelyread books is the 1887 On the Genealogy of Morality or ofMorals o The book consists of three parts each of which is selfcontained though fairly closely related with the others 0 The rst part Good and Evil Good and Bad attempts to document an inversion from noble values into Christian values 0 The second part Guilt B ad Conscience and Related Matters tries to show how religion originated through the invention of guilt as a form of selftorment o The third part What Do Aescetic ldeals Mean purports to explain how hu manity which suffers naturally and apparently for no reason adopts suffering itself as the reason for its existence The English Psychologists 0 Nietzsche begins by considering the case of the English psychologists who attempt to explain human behavior through such mechanisms as principles of association 0 It would be an offense to human pride if all that is responsible for our mental life is so mechanical 0 Thus it is interesting to speculate as to what drives these psychologists to treat the human being in this way A mean instinct to belittle humanity The pessimistic gloominess of disillusioned idealists A tuni away from Plato and Christianity A taste for the strange and paradoxical 0 Perhaps it is one of these reasons or a bit of all of them 0 Whatever the reason Nietzsche holds out the hope that they are brave gener ous and proud animals who hold out the hope of leaniing the truth however distasteful it tunis out to be The Unhistorical Deduction of the Concept of Good 0 For all their good spirits the English psychologists failed in their attempt to understand the concept of good 0 They gave an historical explanation of the origin of the concept 0 Originally the nonegoistic acts of people are praised and called good by their recipients because they found them to be useful to themselves 0 Then the origin of the praise was forgotten and it became simply routine to praise nonegoistic acts That which is merely useful to the recipient is erroneously called good in itself 0 The results of the English psychologists are a devaluation of the proudest values of humanity 0 But they are essentially unhistorical because they re ect the idiosyncratic cat egories of the psychologists utility forgetting routine and error The Origin of Good and Bad 0 The error of the English psychologists lies in locating the source of the concept good in the sentiments of the recipients of actions 0 Instead its origin lies in the valuation given by the noble the mighty the high placed and the highminded to their own actions 0 A good action is one that is rstrate in contrast to everything lowly low minded common and plebean o A bad action is one undertaken out of baseness o This contrast between the actions of the nobles and that of the base depends on the pathos of distance the feeling of superiority of the higher over the lower 0 There is no element of utility here as the noble values spring from their passions rather from any cool calculation 0 Nor is there any reason to call good with actions that are not undertaken ego istically as the herd would have it Goodness and Utility 0 The rst mistake of the English psychologists was to misunderstand the origin of the concept of good in utility 0 Their second mistake was internal to their theory that goodness was taken to be an intrinsic value because the usefulness of good actions was forgotten o Surely if the actions were so useful their utility should never be forgotten o A more plausible view was taken by Herbert Spencer 0 He also equates goodness with utility but he claims in addition that this associ ation is never forgotten o It is because the association is made universally that goodness is thought to be an intrinsic value 0 Although Spencer s view is wrong it is at least in itself rational and psycholog ically tenable as an explanation The Etymology of Good and Bad 0 From the point of view of etymology the study of the origins of words one can obtain an essential insight into the genealogy of morality itself 0 In a number of different languages the word good developed to refer to features of nobility or aristocracy Spiritually highminded Spiritually privileged o This development runs parallel to that of the word bad which refers to features of the base Common Low 0 In German the word bad schlecht is the same as simple schlicht and is merely descriptive of someone as common in contrast to the nobility o This development has not been noticed due to the destructive prejudice of democ racy in modern times The Language of Nobility 0 Further etymological investigation yields more information about the attitude of the nobility 0 Originally the noble referred to themselves in a way that revealed their superi ority in power The mighty The commanders 0 They later used words that showed that thought of themselves as true or real as compared to the deceitful comman man 0 Linguistic usage also associated the nobility with light color blonde and base ness with dark color 0 This corresponds to the the lightcolored skin and hair of the nobility and the darkcolored skin and hair of their subjects 0 The emerging strength of the plebean dark people coincides with the rise of modern democracy which may be a counterattack against the nobility Priestly Aristocracies 0 When the clerical caste is the highest caste they appropriate the word pure and detach good from social standing 0 Originally purity was a matter of simple hygiene but in the hands of the priestly aristocracy it is transformed into an unhealthy brooding and emotional explo siveness o The metaphysics of the clergy nds purity by repudiating the senses 0 Its discontent is to be cured by God which is the epitomy of purity pure nothingness o This made the passions dangerous which in turn made the human being into an interesting animal The human soul became deep The human soul became evil for the rst time The SlaveRevolt in Morality 0 When the priestly caste splits off from the aristocratic there exists potential for con ict 0 The priests are physically powerless but they are the most dangerous opponent because they become great haters o The priestly haters develop intellect as their weapon which keeps human history from being far too stupid a thing 0 The Jewish priesthood were able to get their revenge against the powerful by inverting their values 0 Wealth nobility and power are tunied into evil and only the poor lowly and powerless are good 0 This inversion constituted the slaverevolt in the history of morality o The revolt remains successful and has been forgotten only because of its success The Emergence of Christianity 0 From the hatred and revenge of the Jewish priesthood grew love which could only have come from hatred 0 Love is not the negation of hatred but rather is its culmination o The message of love preached by Jesus was an af rmation of the inverted values glorifying the base and villifying the noble o By denouncing him the Jews made Jesus was the bait to draw their enemies into accepting their values 0 The creation of the bait was an act of great ingenuity which produced irresistible lures The power of the symbol of the holy cross The horrible paradox of God on the cross The cruel execution of God for the salvation of mankind A FreeThinker s Epilogue 0 Nietzsche imagines a response by a contemporary freethinker whom he char acterizes as an honest animal i i i and moreover a democrat o The target of the freethinker is the church rather than the inversion of values that was originally brought about by the priestly caste The values that were overthrown are not noble and it is best that they be over thrown on behalf of the people 0 The people have been saved from their former masters by the priestly poison which now does its work more slowly and discreetly At this point in time the heavyhanded church stand as an impediment to this leveling process because it slows it down by alienating a more tender intellect i i i a truly modeni taste The Man of Nobility and the Man of Ressentiment o The values of the noble man and the man of ressentiment work in opposite ways 0 The values of the noble are positive an af rmation of what he is o The values of the man of ressentiment are negative a condemnation of what someone else the noble is o The noble looks at those below him as merely unhappy and at his enemies as worthy of respect which is a bridge to love 0 The man of ressentiment feels the might of those above him and reacts by declar ing them evil 0 Any cleverness on the part of the noble is subordinate to his power and thrust of his instincts o The man of ressentiment regards cleveniess as a condition of the rst rank The Taming of Humanity 0 There is a fundamental tension between the nobility and the conditions under which they are restrained 0 Like the lion the blonde beast they must burst out of their con nement and embark on a bloody rampage o The noble races Roman Arabian Germanic Japanese nobility Homeric heroes Scandinavian Vikings are viewed by their victims as the barbarians o The meaning of culture is to tame the beast so that it becomes civilized 0 Modern man is no more than a teeming mass of worms who is not to be feared but rather viewed with disgust 0 And yet tamed modeni man thinks of himself as the higher man who is the pinnacle of history Is There Hope for Mankind 0 Nietzsche nds absolutely intolerable the situation that something failed comes near me 0 Everything else no matter what the hardship can be borne and the greatest dif culties set us up for new triumphs 0 He looks for a glimpse of a man whojusti es himself This person would be something perfect completely nished happy pow erful triumphant which still leaves something to fear 24 0 But what we see instead as the result of the levelling process is a sight which makes us grow tired o In losing our fear of man we lose our love for him 0 Man becomes better the more he declines 0 Our tiredness at the sight of man is modeni nihilism The Origin of Freedom and Responsibility 0 The attributes of strength and weakness are natural as are all the acts which are performed through strength and weakness 0 Common language deceives us into believing that behind every act is a doer which can be separated from the act There is an object a bolt of lightning which causes the ash of light to occur 0 This separation is applied to persons by the weak in the claim that it is the sub jec who is responsible for the act 0 Thus it is claimed that the strong are free not to act in the way that strong people naturally do 0 The weak then can claim that they have freely chosen weakness which is to say that they have chosen to be good How Ideals Are Fabricated o The ideals of the weak are created by the lie that regards weakness as an accom plishment 0 There are numerous ideals that are created in this way Passive impotence is called goodness Timid baseness is called humility Submission to those one hates is called obedience o The misery of the weak is considered patience and life is considered as a test that may eventually be paid back with happiness 0 The most masterful reversal is the conversion of hatred and revenge into jus tice 0 They live in faith waiting for the last judgment which is the coming of their kingdom called the kingdom of God The Kingdom of God 0 The kingdom of God for which the believers wait in patience requires an eter nal life 0 The bliss to be had in this Paradise is born of hatred 0 Nietzsche parodies Dante s inscription over the gates of hell Eternal love cre ated me as well as an inscription over the gates of heaven Eternal hate created me as well 0 He then quotes Thomas Aquinas who comments that the pleasures of heaven will be enhanced by the witnessing of the tortures of the damned 0 He gives a very extensive quotation from Tertullian with the same theme The philosophers who have taught that there is no soul will be burned along with the students they persuaded Rome versus Jerusalem o The titanic battle between good and bad and good and evil as opposing value has not yet ended though the side of good and evil is dominant o The battle is symbolized by struggle between the Romans and the Jews The Romans were a noble people stronger and nobler than anybody hith erto who had lived or been dreamt of on earth The Jews were priestly steeped in ressentiment and possessing an unpar allled genius for popular morality o In Rome today one bows to a Christian priest o The values of classical Rome were revived brie y during the Renaissance only to be crushed by the Reformation led by the plebean English and Germans 0 Yet in recent times Napoleon has appeared as the embodiment of noble values The Road Ahead 0 Nietzsche concludes by asking rhetorically whether the struggle is over or whether it will have to be carried out more violently in the future 0 He expresses his conviction that the struggle to get beyond good and evil should be desired and willed with all of one s strength 0 Returning to the original theme of the essay he advocates the creation of a prize essay What signposts does linguistics especially the study of etymology give to the history of the evolution of moral concepts 0 He then notes that not only philosophers and linguists but also physiologists and physicians should conceni themselves With the evolution of moral concepts 0 They can reveal the origin of values and in particular can show how What is useful for a people does not coincide With What would further the development of a higher type Nietzsche s Twilight of the Idols G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 Devaluing Life 0 Friedrich Nietzsche 18441900 promises to philosophize with the hammer 0 His method in Twilight of the Idols is to examine philosophical claims by expos ing the psychological conditions of the philosophers who have proposed them quotThese wisest sages of all times one should rst take a close look at them 0 The claim that interests him here is that human life is of little or no value Socrates Livingithat means being sick a long time 0 Nietzsche takes this attitude to be a symptom of a sickness on the part of the philosophers 0 He asks rhetorically whether wisdom embodied in his own approach is excited by the scent of rotting meat 0 His task then is to discover the sources of the philosophers antilife attitude Instinct and Happiness 0 Nietzsche analyzes the case of Socrates to uncover the origin of the antilife attitude 0 He understood Socrates to be symptomatic of an impending decline in Greek civilization 0 Every civilization including the Greek is healthy when the happiness of its peo ple is the product of instinct o The Greek civilization was becoming sick because its instincts were at war with one another producing a decadent state 0 Socrates recognized this sickness in himself when he agreed that he contained all bad cravings within him 0 He claimed to have mastered these cravings by using reason as a tool of control 0 His formula was reason 2 virtue happiness The Futility of Reason 0 Later Greek philosophers embraced Socrates s advocacy of reason as a tyrannical force that can being instinct under contro o In an ascendant civilization as was the Greek before Socrates excessive use of reason was considered bad manners o Socrates used reason in the form of dialectical argument as a weapon against his enemies 0 He was able to humiliate them but he never succeeded in convincing them 0 In general reason is able to suppress instincts but it is not able to eliminate them 0 Nietzsche speculates that Socrates recognized his inability to overcome his sick ness and willingly embraced death 0 And so reason in general is no cure for a declining civilization The Idiosyncracies of the Philosophers o Philosophers are idiosyncratic in that their views are not held by the great mass of peop e 0 Nietzsche discusses two idiosyncracies of the philosophers Their hostility to history and more generally to becoming Their confusion of what comes rst with what comes last 0 The rst idiosyncracy is manifest in their view that the senses bear false testi mony of becoming whereas reason reveals the truth of being 0 The second idiosyncracy gives rise to the concept of a cause of itself which is the philosophers conception of God 0 Nietzsche views both of these idiosyncracies as symptoms of the decadance of the philosophers Becoming and Being o The consensus of the philosophers is that the senses lie by presenting plurality and change An exception is Heraclitus who thought that the senses lie by presenting objects as uni ed and persisting o The senses are said to present only appearances to which is opposed unchang ing being or reality o On this view the role of the body is degraded to the point that it too is regarded as being unreal although it has the nerve to behave as if it were real 0 According to Nietzsche the body and its senses are extremely revelatory and what they reveal is the basis of science 0 Reason on the other hand tunis features of the dynamic world revealed by the senses into conceptual mummies sucking the life out of everything it touches o The God of the philosophers is itself a conceptual mummy a completely empty concept of the most real being This abstraction comes at the end of the process by which reason falsi es the presentations of the senses 0 Yet the philosophers think that the most real being is the starting point of all reality 0 It is supposed to be the starting point because the most real being is said to be the cause of itself 0 This inversion occurs because being is more highly valued than is becoming o The philosophers claim that what is less valuable can only come from what is more valuable so being must be the origin of becoming Nietzsche claims that society has paid dearly for taking seriously the mental distortions of sickly webspinners Language and Being o The inversion of the priority of being over becoming has its roots in language The error of being has on its side every word every sentence we speak The fundamental unit of language is the subject eg in Aristotle where all else is in or said of a subject 0 This leads to a metaphysics of things which act 0 The original subject is the I which is said to will 0 This relation of enduring subject to transitory action is projected onto all of re ty39 0 Once a real world of enduring things is set up philosophers discover that we can be certain of it through reason in a way we could never be certain through the senses of becoming The Rise and Fall of the Real World 0 Nietzsche recounts the development of the relation of real to apparent o In Plato the real world is accessible to the wise and virtuous 0 Christianity then claims that the real world the realm of God is attainable only in another life 0 For Kant the real world is only an ideal which gives us some consolation for our existence in the world of appareances 0 As science develops it is realized that the real world no longer has relevance to our lives at all 0 Enlightened modern people reject the real world altogether and with the ap parent world since there is no longer any contrast to be made Dealing With the Passions 0 Human passions in and of themselves are stupid and must be dealt with 0 Christianity on behalf of those who are weak of will declares the passions to be the enemy and seeks to eradicate them 0 Thus it tunis against sensuality and even life itself 0 The best way to deal with the passions is spiritualize them as when sensuality is tunied to love 0 This option requires dealing with the passions intelligently but Christianity has waged war against the intellect o In trying to destroy the passions Christianity promotes quietude but Nietzsche holds that we need opposition in order to achieve anything worthwhile Naturalistic Morality 0 Nietzsche argues in favor of a healthy morality It is exempli ed by ripeness and mastery in the midst of doing creating working willing o A healthy morality must be naturalistic built upon natural instincts and not aiming to destroy them 0 Both the antinaturalistic Christian morality and the kind Nietzsche advocates place some kind of value on lifeiagainst it or for it 0 But valuation itself is merely a symptom of the kind of life one is living 0 It is naive and bigoted to say that people should be one way or another 0 The naturalistic moralist the immoralist to Christianity does not fall into this trap but nds value even in the life of the priest Causality o Morality and religion are based on a confusion of cause with effect Virtue is the effect not the cause of happiness Vice is the effect not the cause of degeneracy o The root of the confusion is a mistaken conception of how causality works 0 We take as a model of causality an act of the human will on the basis of a motive 0 But in fact in the intenial world will and motive simply accompany the production of an act rather than cause it 0 We invent these imaginary causes in order to explain our pleasant and unpleas ant feelings in a way that appears to give us some measure of control over them 0 This is the basis of religion where virtue beings about pleasant feelings and vice unpleasant ones Free Will 0 Free will is an invention of theologians who want people to feel responsible for their actions 0 This results in a feeling of guilt which religious leaders use as an instrument of subjugation o The doctrine of free will depends on making will and motive into causal agents which is an error 0 The healthy morality of the naturalist seeks to purge guilt from the world 0 No one is in fact responsible for what they are and there is no goal of life im posed on us There is nothing that could rule measure compare judge our being 0 By denying God the immoralist denies responsibility and in this way the world is redeemed The Original Immoralists 0 As has been noted Nietzsche claimed that the philosophical doctrines of Socrates Plato and the later Greek philosophers are symptoms of the decline of their civ ilization o In earlier times the Greeks exempli ed a healthy naturalistic morality o This morality is to be found in the cult of the god Dionysis The sensualism of the Dionysian rites celebrates all of life through its exploration of sexuality Even pain is glori ed because it necessarily accompanies childbirth The Dionysian cult was a celebration of life it made all aspects of life holy Nietzsche s immoralism and antiChristianity stems ultimately from his discov ery of this lifeaf rming morality Aristotle s Nicomachean Ethics G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 Beyond Platonic Ethics 0 Plato greatly expanded the Socratic doctrine of virtue 0 He classi ed the virtues and associated them with parts of the state and of the soul Temperance moneymakers emotions Courage soldiers will Wisdom guardians reason Justice harmony of the parts 0 Although there is an explanation of the virtue of justice the other three virtues are not fully explained o Plato does not distinguish between the practical wisdom that should govern ac tion from the theoretical wisdom that should govern opinion 0 Aristotle tackled these issues and many more in his Nicomachean Ethics The Good 0 For Plato what makes an action person or state of affairs good is that it shares in the form the good itself 0 As we have seen Aristotle rejects Platonic forms and so must give a different account of what makes things good 0 His view is teleological the good is the end toward which everything is directed 0 There is the good for The practice of crafts production of an object or a state of an object Investigations discovery of truths Actions attaining what is desired Decisions performing actions which will attain what is desired 0 Generally the products of our activities are better than the activities themselves 0 Aristotle wonders whether there is an endproduct which is best of all The Highest Good 0 Aristotle gives a reason to think that there is a highest good 0 Some activities have ends which themselves are directed toward other ends Making equipment for horses serves the end of horsemanship Horsemanship serves the end of generalship o The higherlevel ends are more choiceworthy than are the lower since the lower ends are pursued for the sake of the higher ends 0 It would be futile to pursue ends that do not terminate in a highest end so it seems that there should be a highest good for each speci c activity 0 If there is an end toward which all activity whatsoever is directed this would be the highest or most choiceworthy good Communitarianism 0 Knowledge of the highest good would be extremely helpful in determining the best way to live 0 So it is useful to look for a science whose subject is the highest good 0 The best way to live might be determined by what is best for The individu al The community 0 Aristotle is a communitarian in that he claims that the good for the community is higher than that for the individual The good for the community is ner and more divine than that for the individual 0 The science of what is good for the community is political science 0 So the study of individual good ethics is useful insofar as it serves political science Happiness 0 So what is the highest good achievable in actions 0 Everyone educated or not agrees that the highest good is happiness eudae mania o It is also agreed that being happy is the same as living well and doing well 0 But the agreement is only about the name there is much disagreement about what it is to live well and do well The many take happiness to be something obvious and evident 6 Pleasure We alth Honor Some among the educated presumably Plato take it that all of these goods are caused to be good by something that is good in its own right 0 Those in the best position to settle the issue are those with the best upbringing Three Kinds of Life 0 Roughly speaking there are three kinds of life that are thought to be the good li e Of grati cation favored mainly by the many Of political activity favored by the cultivated Of study favored by the scholarly o Aristotle rejects the rst two kinds as characteristic of the good life The life of grati cation is no better than the life of a nonhuman animal The life of political activity aims at either 6 Honors which is insecure because it depends on the actions of others 6 Virtue which is compatible with a life of hardship o The life of study is the good life but it will be treated later Critique of Plato s Theory 0 Aristotle nds it uncomfortable to criticize Plato s theory of the good as Plato was his friend but he must do so in the interests of truth 0 There is no common idea of good which covers both ways we understand it As substance the good As quality is good As relative is useful for o If there were a single thing that makes all things good there would be a single science of what is good 0 But there are many sciences of subordinate goods 0 Medicine studies the means to health which is a good It seems pointless to seek a science of what is good in its own right since knowledge of this plays no role in the sciences of the subordinate goods The End is Happiness o The good of any activity is that for the sake of which something is undertaken Health in medicine Victory in generalship 0 Unlike any subordinate goods a highest good is one that is complete 0 If only one good is complete then this is the highest good 0 Only an end pursued in its own right is complete 0 Happiness is the only human good pursued in its own right 0 So only happiness is complete and therefore only happiness is the highest good for human beings 0 Honor pleasure understanding are all chosen for the sake of happiness Human Function and Human Good 0 To understand happiness better we need to understand what the good is for hu mans as humans 0 The distinctively human function is for the soul to act in ways that involve reason Obeying reasons Reasoning o The function of an excellent person is to use reason well and nely o A function is carried out excellently according to the virtue of that function 0 So the good of human beings is the rational activity of the soul in accord with the best and most complete virtue 0 Moreover this activity must be carried out over a considerable period of time Happiness 0 There are many accounts of what happiness is Virtue Prudence Wisdom One or more of the above with the addition of pleasure Any of the above with the addition of external prosperity 0 Living virtuously prudently and Wisely brings pleasure With it so it need not be added 0 Happiness is the Best Finest Most pleasurable 0 But it also requires extenial goods since Fine actions require resources De ciencies lead to unhappiness The Source of Happiness 0 There are several views about the source of happiness Some form of cultivation Learning 6 Habituation Divine fate Luck 0 Cultivation is the best means to happiness 0 It allows happiness to be accessible to anyone With means 0 It conforms to the claim that political science is the science of human good since the state is in a position to promote the cultivation of virtue The Ups and Downs of Life 0 A person s happiness is to be measured by the course of his lifetime 0 It applies to the person While alive not When dead 0 Minor ups and downs of fortune do not affect a person s overall happiness The main factor is virtue Which is stable 0 A person can lose a good deal of happiness due to extenial misfortune But even then When one has virtue he Will never be miserable o The most blessed person is one Who has and Will keep the goods required for maximal happiness The Virtues o The political scientist must study the soul in order to understand virtue o The soul is divided into two parts The nonrational The rational o The virtues of the nonrational part of the soul are not distinctively human 0 The rational soul functions in two ways It listens to and obeys reason as with parental advice It reasons actively as with mathematical proof 0 Correspondingly there are two kinds of virtue Virtues of character generosity temperance Virtues of thought wisdom comprehension prudence Virtues of Character 0 Virtues of character are the ethical virtues 0 They are the product of habit while virtue of thought arises from teaching 0 They do not arise in us naturally but require repetitive training of the kind one gets in learning a craft 0 It is allimportant to develop these habits from youth 0 Excess in either direction is detrimental to the development of virtue Someone who never stands rm becomes cowardly Someone who fears nothing becomes rash 0 One develops the habit of standing rm by actually doing so and the more ac customed he is to doing this the more he will do so in the future Pleasure and Pain 0 Pleasure and pain can be a help or a hindrance to virtue One nds it painful to abstain from excessive drinking 0 Correct education will enable us to feel pleasure and pain appropriately for ac tion The temperate person will feel pleasure in abstinence 0 Because of the bad effect of pleasure and pain on human behavior some have held that virtue is being unaffected by them 0 But the correct response is that the virtuous person is affected by pleasure and pain in the right way 0 Virtue is about pleasures and pains Character and Action 0 Virtuous actions are to be understood in terms of what a virtuous person would do 0 A just action for example is an action that would be carried out by a just person 0 But virtuous character is the result of the performance of virtuous actions 0 These actions put the person into the right state to perform other virtuous actions 0 There are three conditions necessary for virtuous action Knowing that the action is virtuous Deciding to do the action because it is virtuous Making the decision on the basis of a rm and unchanging state The Mean 0 Virtue is a state of a person but what kind of state 0 In nature craft and science a good product is one that is not excessive in any way 0 Because it is superior to these things a virtuous state is one that produces mod erate results 0 It is a mean between two vices one of excess and one of de ciency o In one sense though virtue is an extremeian extreme of goodness of one s state and one s results The Individual Virtues o Courage is the mean between feelings of fear and of con dence 0 Temperance is the mean between pains and pleasures 0 There are two virtues which are means between wastefulness and stinginess Generosity were small matters are concerned giving to charity Magni cence where large matters are concerned endowing an institute to study disease 0 Other virtues of character are described as means between extremes o It remains to describe virtues of thought and justice as a virtue Virtue and Practical Reason 0 Now that the virtues of character have been explained we may tunr to their role in human action 0 The link is through decisions to act 0 Decisions are the outcome of rational deliberation o Rational deliberation is practical reasoning We deliberate about the practical means whereby we can bring about our ends 0 The ends for which we act are what we think to be good for us 0 Virtues of character allow a person to recognize what really is good 0 The good is then adopted as the end whose means are the subjects of rational deliberation Can Virtuous Acts Be Praised 0 An action is voluntary to the extent neither it nor its end is forced upon the agent 0 We praise or blame a person for acting only if the action is voluntary o If the person has chosen the means by rational deliberation then to that extent the action is voluntary o If the end is determined by one s virtuous character it might seem to be involun tary 0 But the virtuous character of the agent is acquired willingly through cultivation of habit 0 So deliberative action from a virtuous character is voluntary and virtuous acts can be praised Justice If justice is a virtue of character it is a state of a soul which aims at the mean between extremes Just people are lawful and fair so acting lawfully and fairly should promote some mean The extremes are What is unconditionally good What is unconditonally bad Acting lawfully and fairly promotes the mean which is what is good for the agent Wealth is unconditionally good but it is not good for me if I gain it by theft Correctly established law will promote other virtues so justice is the supreme virtue Justice is also complete because unlike the other virtues it is directed toward other people Virtues of Thought Having completed his discussion of the virtues of character Aristotle turns to the virtues of thought There are two virtues of thought Prudence rationally acquired true beliefs conceniing contingent facts about what is good for us Wisdom theoretical knowledge of necessary truths It may seem that prudence and wisdom are of no use to one who is already clever But the two virtues are productive Prudence elevates the natural virtue of cleverness to full virtue by direct ing it to the good Wisdom produces happiness Socrates was correct in saying that all virtues require prudence but wrong in saying they are all instances of prudence A Life of Study or a Life of Action 0 A life of study is superior to a life of action 0 The reason for the superiority of study is that study is an end in itself While action is aimed at a further end 0 Study is also the most characteristically human function one not shared With animals 0 On the other hand it is shared With the divine beings Whose activity consists entirely of contemplation 0 Since the life of the scholar is both the most human and partakes of the divine it is the happiest life 0 Persons of action can attain a secondary degree of happiness if they possess the virtues of character 0 Because of the superiority of study to action Wisdom would be a virtue superior to prudence Virtue and Political Science 0 A good society Will enact laws Which promote the development of virtue in in dividuals 0 As noted above virtue is developed by habituation and the process begins in the ome The laws should promote the continuation of the process of habituation after the individual leaves the home 0 If the laws are to be effective they must be based on political science The Sophists teach only how to be successful politically and so their teaching does not promote good legislation 0 Political science Will examine two things Existing political theory The successes and failures of past and present political institutions Introduction to Philosophy G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 What is Philosophy 0 One of the most commonly asked questions about philosophy is what is it 0 There are several ways to answer the question Thematic Philosophy treats certain subjectmatters Methodological Philosophy uses certain methods Descriptive Philosophy is what people do in their capacity as philoso phers o Philosophers have treated many subj ectmatters using many methods 0 There is much disagreement among philosophers about whether speci c subj ect matters and methods are legitimate The Subjects of Philosophy 0 Among the areas generally recognized as subj ects of philosophical investigation are the following Metaphysics the general nature of reality Epistemology the nature of knowledge Ethics the values of human action Aesthetics the nature of art or beauty Logic the correct forms of inference Philosophy of x x 2 science mind language etc History of philosophy The Methods of Philosophy 0 Among the activities widely used by philosophers are these with an example following each Analyzing language or concepts what does good mean what is good ness Giving an account of mental activity how do we reason Theorizing about what is beyond experience does God exist Theorizing at a high level of generality what is a thing Posing and trying to solve puzzles is it wrong to kill in order to save a life Defending claims about how philosophy should be done historically ahis torically The History of Western Philosophy 0 The history of westeni philosophy can be broken down roughly into several phases Hellenic 6th4th cent BC Hellenistic 3rd cent BC to 2nd cent AD Medieval 5th15th cent AD Renaissance 16th cent AD Modeni 17th19th cent AD Contemporary 20th21st cent AD Analytic 6 Continental 0 Philosophers in each period differed in their methods but the split between ana lytic and continential philosophy seems more profound Some Superstars of Philosophy 0 The following are generally acknowledged to be among the greatest Westeni philosophers Plato 4th cent BC Aristotle 4th cent BC Rene Descartes 17th cent AD David Hume 18th cent AD Immanuel Kant 18th cent AD Plan for the Course 0 The course Will be organized around the historical development of two broad subjects Metaphysics and Epistemology Ethics 0 Each class Will cover reading from a classic text in the history of Western phi losophy o Emphasis Will be on in uential philosophical theories and the basic arguments given to support them Anselm s Proslogion G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 Ontology 0 Much of metaphysics concerns ontology theories about what is real and what is not real 0 The main ontological question discussed thus far has been whether Platonic Forms are real Plato held that the Forms are real Aristotle denied the reality of the Forms 0 A perennial ontological question is whether a God exists 0 This question might be settled by appeal to religious faith but philosophers have weighed in with their own arguments for and against 0 This ontological question became especially prominent after philosophy became dominated by Christianity in Europe during the Middle Ages 0 Anselm of Canterbury 10331109 was among the rst to give a philosophical argument for the existence of a Christian God Two Ways of Existing o It seems pretty obvious that some things exist only in the understanding Odysseus the hero of Homer s Odyssey 0 A being that exists in the understanding will be said to existo o A being that exists independently of the understanding in reality will be said to existl Odysseus existso but does not existl Homer exists1 0 We can think of what existsl but which might only have existedo Homer s book The Odyssey which Homer might have thought of but not written o Is there anything which cannot existo unless it existsl That Than Which Nothing Greater Can Be Thought 0 Anselm claims that we can think of something whose nonexistence1 is unthink able 0 We can think of something than which nothing greater can be thought NGT 0 He then argues that the existencel can be established on the basis of the existenceo of an NGT o Anselm makes the further claim that God is an NGT o If Anselm is right then God s existencel follows from the very notion of God 0 This is the rst version of what Kant would in the eighteenth century call the ontological proof of the existence of God Thinking of an NGT o Anselm claims that even a fool who tries to deny the existence of God under stands what an NGT is when someone uses the expression something than which nothing greater can be thought So there is someone call it S for whom an NGT existso in SS understand ing Principle U o Anselm seems to be claiming that nothing is greater than an NGT either qualita tively or existentially 0 Relative existential greatness is at least partially captured by the following Prin ciple G For any x if x does not existl and x can be thought to existl then something greater than x can be thought If it exists only in the understanding it can be thought to exist in reality as well which is greater 0 A further principle invoked by Anselm applies to any selfconsistent object of thought If something existso in the understanding of S then it can be thought by S to existl Principle E Reconstruction of the Argument of Chapter 2 1 Suppose an NGT does not existl 2 AnNGT existso in the understanding of S U 3 If an NGT existso in the understanding of S then it can be thought by S to existl E gt So an NGT can be thought to existl 2 3 5 So an NGT does not existl and it can be thought to existl 14 6 If an NGT does not existl and can be thought to existl then something greater than it can be thought G 7 So something greater than an NGT can be thought 5 6 8 Something greater than an NGT cannot be thought De nition of NGT 9 So an NGT existsl Reductio on 1 Analysis of the Reconstructed Argument of Chapter 2 o The argument is reconstructed so as to be deductively valid The conclusion cannot be false if all the premises are true 0 The premises of the argument are the principles U E and G 0 One way to criticize the argument is to attack the plausibility of any of the premises 0 Since Premise E is fairly plausible we will take a look at Principles U and G Criticisms of Principle U 0 Some critics including perhaps Thomas Aquinas have questioned Principle U which claims that someone S has a notion of an NGT o Leibniz in the seventeenth century noted that it is dif cult to tell whether the notion of a greatest being is consistent He tried to prove that the notion of a fastest speed is not consistent One could also demand a fuller account of the greater than relation as the sense of greater than used in Principle G is very weak 0 One might reject the very notion of existential greatness that existencel is greater than existenceo Criticism of Principle G o Principle G For any x if x does not existl and can be thought to existl then something greater than x can be thought The following criticism is based on critical remarks by Immanuel Kant in the eighteenth century 0 Suppose one can think of a being which existso 0 And suppose that such a being does not existl o How could one think something greater than that being 0 One would have to think of a being which existsl and moreover exists1 0 But the last clause is redundant one is already thinking of the being as existingl and cannot think anything existentially greater than that o The point is that the fact that the thing does not existl does not affect how we can think about the thing Conclusion 0 We have looked in some detail at a reconstruction of Anselm s argument of Chap ter 2 o The premises of the reconstructed arguments were criticized 0 There are several possible outcomes of the criticism Accept the criticisms and reconstruction and decide that the argument does not establish what it was intended to establish Reject the reconstruction of the argument as being unfaithful to the text Reject the criticisms as failing to undermine the premises Re fashion the argument so as to avoid the criticisms Appeal to Anselm s argument of Chapter 5 which might not be vulnerable to the criticisms o The ontological proof was presented in a different version in the seventeenth century by Descartes Spinoza and Leibniz Dostoyevski G J Mattey Winter 2008 Philosophy 151 Dostoyevski s Literary Output 0 Dostoyevski wrote many stories and book some of which are considered among the greatest masterworks of world literature 0 Some of his later novels have a great deal of philosophical content and were praised by Nietzsche The rst of these Notes from Underground 1864 was called by Walter Kauf mann the best overture for existentialism ever written 0 His next novel Crime and Punishment 1866 contains themes of guilt and sal vation as well as the question of a higher type of human 0 The nal novel The Brothers Karamzov 1880 contains a famous chapter The Grand Inquisitor that explores the question of freedom and authority Notes from Underground 0 The narrative of Notes from Underground concerns a miserable nihilistic man the imderground man who rails against the possibility of a utopian society 0 The work is a response to the novel What Is to Be Done by Nikolay Cherny shevsky 1862 which describes such a society Chernyshevsky was a revolutionary socialist who emphasized the role of the masses in ultimately bringing down the Russian autocracy Despite or perhaps because of his misery the underground man clings desper ately to his individuality 0 His passionate inwardness and paradoxicalness is reminiscent of what was de scribed in a religious context by Kierkegaard o The emphasis on individual human existence is the reason Dostoyevski is labeled as an existentialist The Structure of Notes from Underground 0 The book consists of a diary which is narrated by an unnamed fortyyearold former govenrment of cial 0 It is divided into two parts Part I Underground consists in a long diatribe about the narrator s condition his view of the world and his relation to society This part is the most directly philosophical portion of the book 0 In a footnote Dostoyevski states that the narrator is a representative of his gen eration and a product of societal conditions at the time o The muchlonger Part II A propos of the Wet Snow presents the actual notes of this person concenring certain events of his life This part is more of a psychological study which is indirectly related to philosophy proper I Am a Spiteful Man 0 The narrator immediately establishes the paradoxical character of his thought and actions 0 He thinks he has a disease yet he refuses to consult a physician 0 At rst he attributes this to superstition but he then notes that belief in medicine is itself superstitious o The real explanation of his inaction is that it is from spite 0 He admits that he cannot harm the medical profession by refusing to consult em 0 He admits that he is only injuring himself yet he insists that his actions are from spite My liver is bad wellilet it get worse 0 He makes a lame joke admits that it was a despicable act but deliberately does not erase it I Am Not A Spiteful Man 0 The narrator who was a collegiate assessor recounts his rude behavior toward all the petitioners who came before him 0 He then admits that his behavior was not from spite because he was not spiteful or even embittered This is the whole point the real sting of his apparently spiteful behavior 0 The real reason he behaved so badly to amuse himself He had lied in describing himself as spitefulwut of spite 0 He was always conscious of many elements opposed to spite absolutely swarm ing within him 0 If treated pleasantly he might be touched but this reaction would torment him for many months 0 He had become sick from torment because he repressed these elements and re fused to allow them any expression Intelligence and Character 0 The narrator has not succeeded in becoming spiteful but he does not know how to become anything Neither spiteful nor kind Neither a rascal nor an honest man Neither a hero nor an insect 0 His tormenting consolation is that only a fool can become something and that an intelligent man cannot become anything seriously 0 A man in the nineteenth century must and morally ought to become someone of character a man of action 0 But a man of action is a limited creature o The narrator had worked at his job only to support himself 0 When he received an unexpected inheretance he quit living in squalor yet beyond his means Too Much Consciousness is a Disease 0 The narrator had noted that he could not become an insect 0 He now explains it by saying that he is too conscious which is in reality an illness This is by contrast with the relatively low level of consciousness possessed by all socalled direct persons and men of action 0 It would be enough for life for a person of the nineteenth century to have half or a quarter of the consciousness of a contemporary inhabitant of St Petersburg St Petersburg is the most theoretical and intentional town on the whole terrestrial globe o The narrator then expresses pride in his disease as others do as well 0 He reiterates his conviction that a great deal of consciousness is in fact a disease Enjoyment in Degradation o The narrator s reaction to the sublime and beautiful is to think ugly thoughts and do ugly deeds o This seems to him not be accidental but to be a way he was bound to react o Eventually he gave up his struggle against this reaction and carried it like a secret from everyone else 0 He began to develop a sort of secret abnormal despicable enjoymen in return ing to his squalid dwelling and tearing into himself for some loathsome act he had committed that day 0 The bitterness nally turned to sweetness and then into positive enjoyment 0 He asks how this enjoyment is to be explained The Inertia of the Acuter Conscious o The initial explanation of the enjoyment in one s own degradation is that it is the product of being too intensely conscious of it o The narrator feels that he has reached the last barrier so that he could not change his state even if he wanted to o This is the result of the inertia that continues the state of the degradation of every acute consciousness 0 So in a sense he is not to blame for being a scoundrel though this is no conso lation for recognizing that one is a scoundrel o It seems that the enjoyment arises from a sense of despair in the recognition that by a law of nature one is powerless to act 0 The basis for action will be explained further Retreat to the Underground 0 For ordinary persons of action direct persons of whom the narrator professes envy an act such as one of revenge is easily explained The feeling of revenge takes possession of their whole being and they rush forward like enraged bulls 0 When they meet opposition that cannot be overcome the wall they accept the fact and even nd some comfort in it 0 But the acutely conscious person is tormented by the barrier and in its presence thinks of himself as more of a mouse than a man No one asks him to see himself this way 0 While the ordinary person simply takes revenge to be justice the mouse recog nizes it for what it is o The mouse s reaction is to go underground tormenting himself with question upon question amplifying his original feeling and never forgetting it The Pleasure of Irresolution o In his underground lair the narrator nds himself acutely consciousness of the barrier to his action yet hopeful that it can be overcome 0 He oscillated back and forth between resolutions to act and repenting each reso ution o It is the process that explains the savor of that strange enjoyment of which I have spoken o The process is so subtle so dif cult of analysis that people of strong nerves cannot understand what it is 0 When they have reason to act they dedicate themselves to action 0 But when confronted with am impossibility due to the laws of nature they will at once back off 0 Thus they will never go underground and will never understand the perverse enjoyment to be found there Twice Two Makes Four 0 The stone wall which makes some actions impossible consists in the laws of nature the deductions of natural science mathematics 0 The strongnerved person simply accepts these things as facts and learns to live with them 0 Even if it is proved that one is descended from monkeys or that everyone is an egoist and virtue a myth this still must be accepted It cannot be disproved that twice two makes four 0 Nature does not care whether one likes these results 0 The narrator vows that he will not accept these laws of nature because he does not care for them 0 This rejection of the laws of nature only adds to his despair because he feels himself to blame and not to blame for them and because there is no one to feel vindictive against The Pleasure of a Toothache o It seems that the narrator s position implies that he should nd despair and hence pleasure in any obstacle he cannot overcome Even something as trivial as a toothache can be a perverse source of plea sure 0 The initial reaction to the unrelenting pain is simply to moan in displeasure 0 But the sophisticated contemporary man will continue to moanionly in a ma lignant way 0 He realizes that he is lacerating and harrassing himself and others for nothing 0 Those he disturbs recognize that his moaning is only for his own amusement o A voluptuous pleasure arises from the disapproval of those he is annoying as he admits that they have seen through him as a fraud The Reasons for Action and Inaction o The narrator asks how someone who tries to nd enjoyment even in a toothache can have any measure of selfrespect 0 He recounts that he would often intentionally get into trouble feel repentant and then realizes that his vows of reform were all a lie o The reason he gives for having intentionally courted trouble is that it is an escape from the ennui that stems from the recognition that everything is govenied by laws of nature 0 Everyone who is direct is able to act because they stupidly identify a primary cause for acting which puts their minds at ease They in ict punishment because it is just to do so 0 The intelligent man recognizes that due to the regress of causes no cause is primary and so he cannot act except out of spite which the narrator lacks 0 There is no selfrespect in this ennui How to Respect Yourself 0 The narrator laments that his inaction did not stem from laziness 0 He ironically describes laziness as a foundation for selfrespect o If he were lazy he would have a character that of a sluggard which would be a career for him Such a life would resemble that of a man who devotes himself entirely to the enjoyment of ne wine He considered his devotion to wine to be a virtue and died feeling tri umphant o The narrator might have chosen the life of a sluggard and glutton with a feeling for the beautiful and sublime 0 Had he done so he would have had a great deal of selfrespect and would have been considered an asset which would be agreeable to hear in this negative 77 age Acting from the Knowledge of Advantage o In Section VII the narrator tunis from describing himself to describing more generally the human condition 0 His focus is on the claim that nastiness is only the result of ignorance of what is truly to one s advantage 0 It is claimed further that it is impossible for one to act against what one knows to be to one s own advantage so that the enlightened person would always do what is right 0 There are two main problems with this thesis Historically people have consciously acted against their advantage out of obstinacy and perversity that sets them on a path that is dif cult and absurd There is an advantage the most advantageous advantage which is in consistent with any calculus of advantages 0 The second of these facts explains the rst people who take the dif cult and absurd path do so in pursuit of the most advantageous advantage Clearer Understanding but No Moral Progress 0 In seeking the most advantageous advantage people are willing to give up all the other advantages Honor Peace Prosperity o Theories that try to explain the real interests of humanity are merely logical exercises 0 An example is the historian Buckel who deduces that as humanity progresses it becomes less bloodthirsty 0 But it is obvious for example from the American Civil War that we are just as bloodthirsty as ever 0 In fact all that civilization has given us is the greater capacity for variety of sensations which may actually promote the enjoyment of bloodshed 0 Even though we see more clearly than in ancient barbarous times we do not act as reason and science dictate The Most Advantageous Advantage Revealed 0 Perhaps it will be objected that there are still some old bad habits which stand in the way of people s willing what is in their interests 0 Further science will educate people that they in fact cannot will on their own Man is something of the nature of a pianokey or the stop of an organ 0 Everything is the result of laws of nature and once these are discovered humans will be relieved of all responsibility 0 Once humanity has become enlightened in this way it will experience halcyon days and erect the Palace of Crystal 0 Even if society were rationally and boringly ordered there will still be a spirit of rebellion against the social order 0 The reason is that independent choice is the most advantageous advantage In Defense of Free Will 0 Perhaps the alleged independent choice can itself be explained entirely by laws of nature 0 But if this were to happen all desire would cease and humans would become like pianokeys 0 Then maybe it would be best for us simply to accept this 0 Yet rationality is only a small part of life and that in living we do stupid things that defy all reason 0 So doing preserves the most precious thing for mankind which is our person ality our individuality o Humanity has proved itself stupid over the ages and the only thing one cannot say is that it s rational 0 Even those sages who seek to set a moral example are eventually false to them selves And even if people were maximally happy or proved to be pianokeys they would make catastrophic choices simply to demonstrate their freedom Certain Events in the Life of the Narrator 0 In Part II of his notes the narrator recounts certain events of his life which serve to illustrate the points he had made more abstractly in Part I o In the course of these events the narrator makes a number of absurd choices culiminating in a choice that is truly catastrophic for him 0 Perhaps his goal is to demonstrate his freedom but it may be that he is simply too sick to tolerate the thought of a normal life 0 The narrative revolves around four more or less extended events His elaborate attempt to insult an of cer His brief plunge back into society His humiliation at a dinner party His encounter with the prostitute Liza The Underground Man at the Of ce 0 Even as a young man of twentyfour the narrator was gloomy and led a solitary life 0 During his twenty years of service at a lowlevel government of ce the narrator was alienated from his coworkers 0 He maintained a conventional appearance to mask his alternate feelings of supe riority and inferiority toward his fellowworkers o What infuriated him was that they were lowly even ugly but the were not at all selfconscious in the way that he himself was 0 The narrator could not bring himself to look these people in the face and was fearful of looking ridiculous in front of them Decent People Are Cowards and Slaves o The narrator acknowledges that he is morbidly sensitive 0 He thinks of himself as a coward and a slave 0 But he states that this is the condition of a decent person in the modern age and indeed in all ages 0 No decent person is valiant 0 Even if a decent person were to behave valiantly on some occasion he would soon enough retreat in the face of some threat 0 Only donkeys and mules are valiant and then only until they are pushed up against the wall 0 But donkeys and mules are not proper models for the behavior of decent people Russian and European Romanticism o The narrator notes that no one was like him and he was like no one else 0 But at times he was for no reason overtaken by skepticism and indifference which led him to seek the company of others 0 Of course he would reproach himself for this behavior branding himself as being a romantic 0 He distinguishes the Russian romantic from the German and French transcen dental romantics 0 Russian romantics are grounded in reality while the European romantics are quite detached from it o The intelligent romantic as opposed to someone seduced by European romanti cism is something of a rogue acting opportunistically while holding on to his ideals Plunging into Vice 0 The narrator s dalliance with social life soon came to an end and he was almost always alone 0 He tried to supress his violent intenial turmoil with external impressions which he found in reading 0 But reading was no substitute for reality so he became bored went out into the world 0 There he plunged into petty degrading Vice 0 He tries to justify this in various ways Nothing in his surroundings was worthy of his respect and attracted him He had an hysterical craving for incongruity 0 His admission of and attempt to justify his lowly behavior are the result of his vow not to lie in telling his story The Affair 0f the Of cer 0 In a taveni an of cer unceremoniously lifted the narrator out of his wayian act which the narrator did not protest o The narrator rationalizes his cowardly behavior by blaming it on vanity which made him fear being misunderstood by the surrounding rabble o For years he nourished his spite and plotted his revenge He would stand in front of the of cer as he was coming toward him on the street and refuse to get out of his way 0 He borrowed money in order to be dressed decently plotted the of cer s comings and goings 0 Several times he moved out of the way at the last second but when he was considering giving up the plan he chanced into the of cer and rammed him The Dream of The Sublime and the Beautiful 0 The narrator s elation at his act of heroism ended after a few days and he once again retreated into his underground lair 0 He tried to escape his selftorment with thoughts of the sublime and the beauti ful fancying himself as a hero and not a chicken heart 0 During these times he felt happy and felt that reality was opening up for him 0 He felt in his fantasies a love that does not exist in reality He triumphed over everyone and they recognized his superiority He forgave all those who had opposed him He fell in love acquired a fortune and then gave it away 0 In the end he recognized this fantasizing as vulgar and contemptible One Must Endure Humans to Embrace Humanity o The narrator s love of humanity inspired by his dreams of the sublime and the beautiful motivated him to try to show some affection to some existing human 0 So when he had dreamt enough he went to visit his one acquaintance who was his boss at the of ce 0 These visits were most uncomfortable for him which led him to defer temporar ily his desire to embrace all of humanity 0 One day when he was unable to endure his solitude or to visit his boss he went to the home of an acquaintance from school Simonov 0 He had generally hated his schoolmates and was hated by them but at times he had been close to Simonov 0 He recognized that it was a mistake to go which itself was a reason for him to knock on Simonov s door The Narrator s SchoolMates Plan a Party 0 At Simonov s apartment were two other schoolmates who had hated the narrator and presently ignored him as if he were a y 0 His own reaction was to be humiliated because of his lowly social station as exempli ed by his being badly dressed o The schoolmates were planning a party for a vulgar friend Zverkov who had recently inherited a fortune 0 There had been an incident between Zverkov and the narrator when they were both in school Zverkov had been boasting about his future sexual exploits which led to the narrator s verbally attacking him The attack was not out of sympathy for women but because the other stu dents had applauded his boasts Eventually the two parted on good terms 0 The narrator succeeds in persuading his schoolmates to allow him to attend the dinner wanting to go because it would be unseemly for him to do so The Narrator s School Days 0 The narrator is moved to recollect his unhappy days as an orphan who was sent to a boarding school by distant relatives 0 He was mercilessly taunted by the stupid boys there whom he thought of as not being real people in that they knew nothing of life 0 Rather than trying to win them over the narrator longs to humiliate them 0 His weapon was to excel in his studies so that he was no longer mocked though he was still hated 0 He genuinely desired a social life but things never worked out 0 One time he had a friend but he repaid the boy s affections by tyrranizing him At the Party for Zverkov o The thought of attending the party for Zverkov excites the narrator as being the real thing 0 There he would gain his revenge by getting the upper hand on the vulgar people who would be there though he really did not care how it would tum out o The time had been changed without his having been told so he has to wait an hour before anyone shows up 0 Zverkov treats the narrator as an inferior o Embarrased to reveal his shabby circumstances the narrator mocks Zverkov s speech 0 Drunk the narrator condemns people of Zverkov s type thus causing a scene 0 But rather than provoking a duel as he would have liked the narrator is simply ignored by the party goers 0 He tries to apologize to Zverkov who replies that it would be impossible for him to be insulted by the narrator From the Party to the Brothel 0 After becoming quite drunk the members of the part decide to adjourn to a house of prostitution o The narrator borrows money to follow them intent on humliating them 0 He humorously contrasts the latest reality with his romantic fantasies and then declares himself to be a scoundrel for making light of what he is doing 0 This thought is dismissed because everything is lost 0 The narrators plan is to give it to Zverkov by pulling the hair of his prostitute and pulling Zverkov s ears 0 He recognizes the plan as being obviously absurd o This stops him for a while but a twist of fate takes him to the brothel anyway The Narrator Meets the Prostitute Liza o The narrator s plan is thwarted when the partiers had already left the parlor with their women 0 Instead of the revelers her meets the somber young prostitute Liza 0 He begins to question her after a long period of silence 0 He paints a bleak picture of the inevitable doom of a young prostitute 0 Then he romanticizes the life that Liza left dwelling on the relation between a father and her daughter 0 Liza points out that many fathers are eager to sell their daughters into marriage 0 The narrator counters by saying that a woman in a bad marriage should count her blessings 0 He claims that love is a holy mystery which will overcome the early problems in marriage and lead eventually to a imion of souls The Narrator Tries to Humiliate Liza o Liza responds by telling the narrator ironically that he speaks somehow like a book which provokes an evil feeling in him 0 He admits that he had not realized that her irony had covered up her feelings which in her innocence she held back out of pride 0 He then turns his rage against Liza and does his best to humiliate her o In other circumstances he could fall in love with her but here in the brothel he can only dominate her 0 Her love is her priceless treasure but that treasure has no value here in the brothel since any lover would have to share her 0 Her ultimate fate will be grim as she will fall into debt move to more squalid brothels and eventually be abandoned to die in a lty corner with no one to remember her The Narrator Drives Liza to Despair o The narrator s speech has its intended effect and he states that he had never before witnessed such despair 0 He asks for her forgiveness and gives her his address 0 Her response is to retrieve a loveletter sent to her by a medical student who knew nothing of her situation 0 Her aim was to show that she was loved even though she recognized that nothing would come of it 0 At this point the narrator leaves the brothel amazed by his sentimentality and upset that Liza might actually call on him in his shabby underground hole 0 He considers going to Liza to explain himself and to beg her not to come but this makes him wrathful and determined to crush her 0 He then begins dreaming about saving her and declaring that he knew about her love from the start Liza Visits the Underground Hole 0 The narrator gets into a confrontation with his servant Apollon whom he hates and who hates him 0 In the midst of this dispute Liza nally comes to visit him 0 Although he is humiliated by his ragged dress and wretched dwellingplace he professes not to be ashamed and indeed becomes hystarical o Liza tells her that she wants to get away from the house of prostitution o The narrator responds by telling her that the object of his sentimental speech there was to humiliate her 0 He had no intention of saving her but was only playing with words 0 He is an egoist who only played at being her hero and he is ashamedia fact for which he blames Liza Liza Embraces the Underground Man 0 The narrator confesses to Liza the wormlike baseness of his existence 0 After asking why she is confronting him in his hole he realizes that she loves him and recognizes that he is unhappy 0 She rushes to him and embraces him which of course puts him to shame 0 Whereas he had played the hero to her victim it is now she who is the heroine and he the humiliated creature 0 He reacts in his usual way by attempting to dominate and tyrannize her wishing to master and possess her 0 He declares that he hates her and she now embraces him rapturously 0 But she then realizes the game he is playing and retreats behind a screen crying The Narrator Rationalizes His Inability to Love 0 The narrator while distraught realizes that he cannot love Liza because even in his dreams he only conceptualized love in terms of mastery and moral superiority o All he wants is to be left alone 0 He had not reckoned that she had come to love him rather than to hear his ne sentiments 0 Because real life was now oppressing him again he only wanted the peace of solitude 0 He gives her money the nal act of cruelty as she was a prostitute which she throws away 0 She runs away and he tries in vain to nd her 0 He wants to beg forgiveness but he realizes that this is to no purpose as he would hate her and try to dominate her tomorrow 0 Which is bettericheap happiness or exalted sufferings Well which is better The Underground Man as AntiHero o This ends the memoirs of the underground man 0 He has illustrated by his actions his conviction that the most advantageous ad vantage is to act out of caprice and against what is otherwise in his selfinterest 0 He describes the situation by saying that the writing of the story is not so much a literary production as corrective selfpunishment l6 0 He has not written a novel because a novel reeds a hero while he is an antihero 0 He asks rhetorically if we are not all cripples like him 0 Without books we would have no idea what to do 0 We do not know how to live and are oppressed at the prospect of being real human beings Crime and Punishment 0 Two years later Dostoyevsky published his rst great novel Crime and Punish ment 0 The protagonist Raskolnikov another antihero in some ways resembles the underground man 0 Leading an equally humiliating life he sets out to do something real 0 His real act is to commit a terrible crime though in the name of a higher consciousness o The engine of the novel is the police investigation of the crime 0 But the real theme is the gradual development of a feeling of guilt in his con science 0 Like the underground man his life become interwined with that of a prostitute this one named Sonia o In the end Sonia moves him to embrace Christainity and to attempt to atone for his crime The Idiot and The Possessed 0 Two of Dostoyevsky s great novels appeared in the years 1868 and 1871 o The Idiot had as its central thesis that a person with the qualities of Jesus would nd it impossible to live in modem times 0 The book is thus an indictment of modem life as inhospitable to true Christianity 0 In The Possessed Dostoyevsky tunis from psychology to politics 0 He portrays revolutionary reformers which he was before being sent to prison as being utterly misguided These were some of the terrorists of the nineteenth century who in reli gious terms are portrayed as demonically possessed o The message of the novel is that only Christian faith and not political revolution can bring salvation European PhiIOSOphy Maj or Philosophical Figures Winter 2007 G J Mattey 3939 17241804 6 Privatdozent at t Professor at Immanuel Kant K nigsberg 1755 Kdnigsberg 1770 439 Censured by Friedrich Wilhelm II 1794 Kant s Writings 393 1770 On the Form and Principles of the Sensible and Intelligible World 393 1781 Critique of Pure Reason 2nd edition 1787 4 1785 Foundations of the MetaphysiCS 0f Morals 39339 1788 Critique of Practical Reason 399 1790 Critique of the Power of Judgment 39139 1793 Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone 393 1797 Metaphysics of Morals 4 And much more Arthur Schopenhauer 17 88 l 860 Spoke English and French Began career in father s business Doctorate Jena 1813 Lectured at University of Berlin 1822 1825 Lost a lawsuit for assault 1 825 Schopenhauer s Writings 4 1813 The Fourfolcl Root of the Principle of S u cient Reason 393 1816 On Vision and Colors 393 1819 The World as Will and Representation 391 1839 On Freedom of the Human Will 4 1840 On the Basis of Morality t 1850 Parerga and Paralipomena essays 139 1762 1814 Johann Gottleib Fiohte 391 Professor at Jena 1794 39239 Forced out of his position 1799 lt First Professor of Philosophy at Berlin 1 8 10 Fichte s Writings z 1792 Attempt ata Critique Ufa Revelation z 1794 Faundation 0f the Science Of Knawledge 17967 Foundation 0f Natural Law z 1798 Attempt at a New Presentati0n z 1799 On the Basis Of our Belief of a Divine Gavernance 0f the Warlcl z 1800 The V0cati0n Of Man 1806 The Characteristics of the Present Age And more Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schemng 9 17751854 0 Professor at Jena 1798 39gt Professor at Wiirzburg Munich Erlangen 18031841 Professor at Berlin assuming Hegel s chair 1841 Schelling s Writings 1795 0fthe I as a Principle 0f Philosophy 1797 Philosophy Of Nature 39gt 1780 System Of Transcendental Idealism 1801 Presentation Of my System of Philosophy 0 o 1804 System of the Whole of Philosophy gt 1809 On the Essence of Human Freedom 4 1827 8 System of the Ages of the World 39 1842 3 Foundations of the Positive Philosophy And many more 39139 1770 1831 Professor at Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Heg Graduated in theology from Tiibingen 1793 39239 Professor at Jena 1801 Heidelberg 1816 3 Professor at Berlin 18 1 8 Hegel s Writings 399 1801 The Di erence between F ichte s and Schelling s System 391 1806 The Phenomenology of Spirit 39339 1816 The Science of Logic 0 e e 1817 Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences subsequent editions 1827 1830 1840 45 1821 Foundations 0f the Philosophy of Right Swen Aabye Kierkegaard 181 3 1855 Inheritance makes him well off 1838 Graduated in theology University of Copenhagen 1841 Engaged to Regine Olsen then broke it off 1840 1 Attended Shelling s lectures 1841 Kierkegaard gt 1841 On the Cancept of I r0ny thesis 4 1843 Either0r 393 1843 Fear and Trembling 1844 Philasaphical Fragments t 1844 The Concept of Anxiety 39A s Writings 1845 Stages 0n Life s Way 4 1846 Cancluding Unscientific Postscript t0 Philasaphical Fragments 399 1849 The Sickness Unto Death And many more Ludwig Feuerbach 1 1804 1872 Son of a philosopher of law Doctorate Erlangen 1828 quot Retired to Bruckberg 1837 39139 Bankrupted moved to Rechenberg 1860 Feuerbach s Writings 39339 1830 Thoughts on Death and Immortality 4 1833 History of Modern Philosophy 399 1839 Toward a Critique of Hegel s Philosophy 399 1841 The Essence of Christianity 3 1842 Preliminary Theses on the Reform of Philosophy 3 1843 Principles of the Philosophy of the Future 1845 The Essence of Religion 3 And others Karl Marx 18181883 Doctorate in Philosophy University of Jena 1841 3939 1843 Moved to Paris 3939 1848 Moved to London Marx s Writings z 1847 The Poverty 0f Philosophy 1848 The Communist Manifesto With Friedrich Engels 139 Capital Volume 0116 2 Unpublished 4 Critique of Hegel s Philosophy Of Right 1 Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts Theses on Feuerbaoh o The German Ideology with Engels Friedrich Nietzsche 439 1 844 1900 439 Studied at Bonn and Suffered mental Leipzig 439 1869 Professor of Classical Philology at University of Basil 439 Resigned from Basil due to illhealth 1879 breakdown 1899 Nietzsche s Writings 1872 The Birth of 39339 1888 Twilight ofthe Tragedy 151015 a 1878 Human All 1888 The Antichrist TOO39Huma 39239 1888 Ecce Homo 1883 5 Thus Spoke 1888 Nietzsche Zarathustra COMM Wagner quot 1886a Bewnd 000d 39I39 1880s notebooks and Evil published by his sister 39 1887 On the as The Will to Power Genealogy of Morals 6 1821 1881 Fyodor Mikhaylovich Dostoeey 439 Military Engineering School 1837 43 39339 Member of Petrashevsky Circle 1 847 9 Political Prisoner 1850 54 439 Editor 1861 77 Dostoevsky Writings z 1846 pom Falk 1871 2 The Possessed 1846 The Double quot 1875 A Raw Youth 4 1862 The Insulted and quot39 1876 Diary Ufa Injured Writer z 1864 Notesfmm 39 1879 80 The Brothers Underground KammaZOV 39 1866 Crime and quot39 And Others Punishment 391 1868 The Idiot Plato s Euthyphro G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 The First Principle 0 Our rst text will be from Plato and centered around his teacher Socrates 469 399 BC 0 Before Socrates and during his life the main outlines of philosophical inquiry had begun to take shape 0 The main question posed by the preSocratic philosophers was metaphysical What is the rst principle arche of all reality 0 The question itself can be understood in two main ways What is the material of which all things are composed Water Thales Air Anaximenes Fire Heraclitus Solid shaped atoms Leucippus Democritus What is responsible for the organization of all things 96 Number Pythagoras Mind Anaxagoras Unity and Plurality o The search for a rst principle of all things is at bottom a search for a uni ed explanation of a plurality of things 0 An alternative approach taken by Parmenides is to deny that there is any plural ity at all 0 According to Parmenides all that is is one metaphysical monism 0 His student Zeno of Elea proposed several famous paradoxes to support Par menides s monism o Zeno used a distinctive argument form reductio ad absurdum that has been widely used by philosophers ever since Assume that opposite of your view is true Show that a contradiction or absurdity follows from the assumption Conclude that the opposite of your view is false in which case your view is true Plato and Socrates 0 Most of the writings of Plato 427347 BC consist of dialogues between Socrates and various residents of and travelers to Athens 0 In most of the dialogues the words of Socrates apparently re ect the thoughts of Plato 0 One of Plato s chief concenis was with the metaphysical question of the basis of unity among different things 0 This is the key issue in his early dialogue Euthyphro The Form 0 We commonly think that distinct objects acts etc what we will call things are of the same kin George W Bush Hillary Clinton Tiger Woods are all people Observing religious holidays making sacri ces behaving virtuously are all pious acts 0 According to Plato things fall under the same kind because there is something the same and alike in every one of them 0 The form is what makes things the kind of things they are 0 The form is also the model that can be used to determine that a thing falls under a kind 0 A key task of metaphysics is to give a description of the form of things of various inds The Case of Piety 0 One does not describe the form of piety by merely listing pious acts 0 Any description of the form of piety must at least give a necessary and suf cient condition for an act to be pious For any act x if x is pious then x satis es the condition necessary For any act x if x satis es the condition then x is pious suf cient o Euthyphro proposes that being loved by the gods is a necessary and suf cient condition for the piety of an act and being hated by the gods is necessary and suf cient for the impiety of an act For any act x x is pious if and only if x is loved by the gods For any act x x is impious if and only if x is hated by the gods A Problem with the Proposal 0 Socrates notes that there is anger and hostility in disagreements between the gods 0 Euthyphro agrees that the only subjects of disagreement that could provoke such a reaction would be what is Just or unjust Good or bad Beautiful or ugly o If god x thinks that an act is just and god y thinks it is unjust god x will love it and god y will hate it o Gods in fact disagree over which acts are just 0 It follows from Euthyphro s conditions that such acts are both pious and impious which is absurd 0 So the conditions given by Euthyphro are not necessary and suf cient for the piety or impiety of an act A Revised Proposal 0 Euthyphro chooses to give up the claim that being loved by some god is a suf cient condition for being a pious action 0 His new description of piety is being loved by all the gods For any act x x is pious if and only if x is loved by all the gods 0 Socrates allows that being loved by all the gods is the same and alike in every pious action 0 But this condition is only a quality of pious acts 0 It is not suf cient to describe the form because it does not explain what makes a pious act pious An Explanatory De ciency 0 Why does Socrates claim that being loved by all the gods does not make a pious act pious o Socrates s argument depends on a general principle Anything that is loved is loved because of a feature it has that makes it loveable 0 So if all the gods love a pious act it is because there is something about the act that makes it loveable o If being pious is what makes a pious act loveable to all the gods then the fact that all the gods love it cannot explain why the pious act is pious rather it presupposes that the act is pious 0 So we must look for some feature of the act other than piety to explain why a pious act is loveable and hence why the gods love it o In that case we cannot explain what piety is merely by the quality of pious acts that they are loved by all the gods What Makes a Pious Act Pious 0 Following a suggestion of Socrates Euthyphro takes piety to fall under the more general kind the just Piety is the part of the just that concerns the care of the gods 0 This account of piety remedies the problem with the proposal that what is pious is what is loved by all the gods It shows what makes a pious act pious without appealing to piety itself It explains why all the gods love a pious act 0 Socrates attempts to refute the account by claiming that the gods cannot be cared for The gods cannot be bene tted by a pious act since they cannot be made better The gods are not served by a pious act since they need no help in attaining their ends 0 Socrates s conclusion is that there is no part of the just that concerns the care of the gods so this attempt to explain what makes a pious act pious fails A Final Attempt at Accounting for Piety o Euthyprho takes a last stab at giving an account of what makes pious acts pious 0 He proposes that pious acts are acts which are performed on the basis of piety o Piety itself is knowledge of how to give to and beg from the gods 0 Like the last one this account would show what makes a pious act pious o It would also explain why the gods love a pious act ie the act is loveable because it is performed in the proper way Objections to the Final Attempt o Socrates has two objections to the account of piety as knowledge of how to give to and beg from the gods 0 The rst objection is similar in its structure to the objection to the previous ac count of piety 1 To give correctly is to satisfy needs 2 But the gods have no needs to satisfy 3 So there is no correct way to give to the gods and so no knowledge of how to give to the gods 0 The second objection focuses on what it would be to give to and beg from the gods properly 1 To give to and beg from the gods properly is to act in a way that is loved by all the gods 2 So a pious act is one which is performed in such a way as is loved by all the gods 3 But being performed in a way such as is loved by all the gods does not explain what makes a pious act pious 4 So being performed based on knowledge of how to give to and beg from is not the form of piety Must the Loved be Loveable o Euthyphro yields to all of Socrates s objections but he did not have to 0 He might have rejected Socrates s general principle that something is loved only because of some feature it has that makes it loveable 0 Thus he could have held that pious acts are loved by the gods simply because they are inclined to love them 0 Then the fact that the gods nd the acts pleasing can explain Why they are pious that is just What it means to be pious o Socrates might object that the gods would then be guilty of acting arbitrarily by loving something Without having a reason for loving it or even that they could not do so 0 And Euthyphro might reply that as gods they do not have to have a reason for doing What they do Anselm s Proslogion G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 Ontology 0 Much of metaphysics concerns ontology theories about what is real and what is not real 0 The main ontological question discussed thus far has been whether Platonic Forms are real Plato held that the Forms are real Aristotle denied the reality of the Forms 0 A perennial ontological question is whether a God exists 0 This question might be settled by appeal to religious faith but philosophers have weighed in with their own arguments for and against 0 This ontological question became especially prominent after philosophy became dominated by Christianity in Europe during the Middle Ages 0 Anselm of Canterbury 10331109 was among the rst to give a philosophical argument for the existence of a Christian God Two Ways of Existing o It seems pretty obvious that some things exist only in the understanding Odysseus the hero of Homer s Odyssey 0 A being that exists in the understanding will be said to existo o A being that exists independently of the understanding in reality will be said to existl Odysseus existso but does not existl Homer exists1 0 We can think of what existsl but which might only have existedo Homer s book The Odyssey which Homer might have thought of but not written o Is there anything which cannot existo unless it existsl That Than Which Nothing Greater Can Be Thought 0 Anselm claims that we can think of something whose nonexistence1 is unthink able 0 We can think of something than which nothing greater can be thought NGT 0 He then argues that the existencel can be established on the basis of the existenceo of an NGT o Anselm makes the further claim that God is an NGT o If Anselm is right then God s existencel follows from the very notion of God 0 This is the rst version of what Kant would in the eighteenth century call the ontological proof of the existence of God Thinking of an NGT o Anselm claims that even a fool who tries to deny the existence of God under stands what an NGT is when someone uses the expression something than which nothing greater can be thought So there is someone call it S for whom an NGT existso in SS understand ing Principle U o Anselm seems to be claiming that nothing is greater than an NGT either qualita tively or existentially 0 Relative existential greatness is at least partially captured by the following Prin ciple G For any x if x does not existl and x can be thought to existl then something greater than x can be thought If it exists only in the understanding it can be thought to exist in reality as well which is greater 0 A further principle invoked by Anselm applies to any selfconsistent object of thought If something existso in the understanding of S then it can be thought by S to existl Principle E Reconstruction of the Argument of Chapter 2 1 Suppose an NGT does not existl 2 AnNGT existso in the understanding of S U 3 If an NGT existso in the understanding of S then it can be thought by S to existl E gt So an NGT can be thought to existl 2 3 5 So an NGT does not existl and it can be thought to existl 14 6 If an NGT does not existl and can be thought to existl then something greater than it can be thought G 7 So something greater than an NGT can be thought 5 6 8 Something greater than an NGT cannot be thought De nition of NGT 9 So an NGT existsl Reductio on 1 Analysis of the Reconstructed Argument of Chapter 2 o The argument is reconstructed so as to be deductively valid The conclusion cannot be false if all the premises are true 0 The premises of the argument are the principles U E and G 0 One way to criticize the argument is to attack the plausibility of any of the premises 0 Since Premise E is fairly plausible we will take a look at Principles U and G Criticisms of Principle U 0 Some critics including perhaps Thomas Aquinas have questioned Principle U which claims that someone S has a notion of an NGT o Leibniz in the seventeenth century noted that it is dif cult to tell whether the notion of a greatest being is consistent He tried to prove that the notion of a fastest speed is not consistent One could also demand a fuller account of the greater than relation as the sense of greater than used in Principle G is very weak 0 One might reject the very notion of existential greatness that existencel is greater than existenceo Criticism of Principle G o Principle G For any x if x does not existl and can be thought to existl then something greater than x can be thought The following criticism is based on critical remarks by Immanuel Kant in the eighteenth century Plato s Republic G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 Beyond Socratic Ethics 0 Socrates maintained several theses in ethical and political philosophy People ought to act only from virtue It is never right to respond to injustice with further injustice A virtuous person can be harmed only by a loss of virtue People have obligations to obey the laws of a state with which they have voluntarily associated themselves 0 But the Apology and Crito leave a number of central questions unanswered in cluding the following What makes a person virtuous What makes an act just or unjust How should society be organized in a virtuous or excellent way 0 Plato began to supply answers to these questions Plato s Meno o In the dialogue Menu Plato elaborates on the nature of virtue 0 He describes virtue as composed of parts which include Justice Temperance Piety o Socrates looks for a common character which all the individual virtues have in common 0 He fails to get a positive answer to the question 0 He advances a negative argument to the conclusion that virtue is not a kind of knowledge and that accordingly it cannot be taught 0 Based on that reasoning he concludes that virtue is given to us by the gods 0 But he notes that the issue of the origin of virtue cannot be resolved until it is discovered what virtue is Plato s Republic o Plato s Republic is a comprehensive work of political philosophy 0 Its main goal is to determine the best possible form of goveniment o The conclusions reached there are important in themselves but they also shed light on the common character of virtue o In Book I of the Republic Plato has Socrates ask what justice one of the virtues is 0 He gets a number of unsatisfactory responses before giving his own account Justice as Rendering to Each His Due o The rst account of justice is given by Simonides and Polemarchus Justice is to give to each person what is due to him For example it is just to repay one s debts to another 0 This account is easily refuted since it is not just to retuni weapons to someone who has gone insane since they were borrowe o Polemarchus revises the account by explaining what due means Justice is to give to each person what he deserves o What someone deserves from me depends on my relationship to him A friend deserves bene ts from me An enemy deserves harm from me The Defeat of the First Account of Justice 0 Socrates refutes the revised rst account of justice in several ways 0 It is possible to be wrong about who is one s friend and who is one s enemy in which case one could act unjustly when he thought he was acting justly o This leads to a second revision of the rst account Justice is to bene t the just and harm the unjust o Socrates then argues that it is never just to harm anyone Harming something make something less excellent with respect to the kind of thing it is Justice is the speci c virtue of a person So harming a person makes him less excellent with respect to justice A just person would not make another person less just 95gtP N So a just person would not harm another person Justice as the Advantage of the Stronger o The second account of justice is given by Thrasymachus Justice is what bene ts the stronger 0 Speci cally the stronger are those in power in a state so that Obeying the laws set down by those in power for their own bene t is just 0 An initial problem for this View is that the rulers may mistake what is for their own bene t and so obedience to their laws will not bene t them The Craft of Ruling o Thrasymachus replies that a ruler does not make a mistake when he is acting as a ruler o Ruling is a craft and insofar as one practices the craft one does so correctly A doctor does not act as a doctor when he harms a patient 0 So in practicing the craft of ruling rulers enact laws that really do bene t them and obeying these laws is just 0 Socrates s further response to Thrasymachus exploits the claim that ruling is a o The important point is that what is advantageous to one acting as a craftsman is to accomplish the ends of the craft It is advantageous to the doctor when acting as a doctor to cure his pa tients 0 And the end of the craft of ruling is to build a healthy state and not to attain personal advantage What Justice Is 0 The rulers of a state act justly when they act for the advantage of those they rule 0 To do so the rules must act wisely from which Socrates concludes that justice is wisdom in ruling 0 Justice then is wise rule for the advantage of those who are ruled 0 Moreover justice is more effective than is injustice A band of thieves that treated one another unjustly would not be able to accomplish much 0 Socrates ends the discussion with Thrasymachus by noting that the just soul in carrying out its functions wisely will live well and be blessed and happy Three Kinds of Value 0 There are three ways in which any kind of behavior might have value 0 It may be intrinsically valuable or valued for its own sake o It may be instrumentally valuable or valued for the sake of something else 0 It may be both intrinsically and instrumentally valuable o Socrates believes that justice is something that is valuable both intrinsically and instrumentally Is Injustice More Valuable Than Justice 0 Glaucon proposes an argument to the effect that justice has instrumental value only 0 He contends that people behave justly only when they are in a position of weak HESS o Injustice is the natural state of people because of their desire to get more and more Someone with an instrument that would make them powerful like the ring of Gyges would use it unjustly o Glaucon s brother Adeimantus notes many ways in which people recognize the advantages of injustice Civic and Individual Justice Socrates undertakes to answer Glaucon and Adeimantus in an indirect way He considers the effects of justice on a city He nds that justice is advantageous to the city He then compares features of the city to those of the soul His conclusion is that acting justly is to be valued for its own sake Civic Harmony The city exists because people must work together in order to achieve their ends If a city is to function well its citizens must take on speci c roles and perform them well To this end people in the city should be trained in carrying out their roles The rulers of the city must be trained as philosophers Only philosophers have the wisdom to reconcile the high spirits needed to rule with the gentleness that must be shown toward those who are ruled Thus the city functions best when it is under the guidance of wise rulers who act with the best interests of those they rule at heart The Virtues of the Soul In Book IV Socrates argues that the just soul will resemble the justlyruled city The city contains many individuals with different functions which must be co ordinated by the rulers The soul contains several parts which must be brought into harmony for it to achieve excellence The emotional The willful The rational Each of these parts of the soul has its own virtue or excellence The emotional temperance The willful courage The rational wisdom The virtue of justice is the coordination of the parts of the soul under the guid ance of the rational part Nietzsche s Twilight of the Idols G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 Devaluing Life 0 Friedrich Nietzsche 18441900 promises to philosophize with the hammer 0 His method in Twilight of the Idols is to examine philosophical claims by expos ing the psychological conditions of the philosophers who have proposed them quotThese wisest sages of all times one should rst take a close look at them 0 The claim that interests him here is that human life is of little or no value Socrates Livingithat means being sick a long time 0 Nietzsche takes this attitude to be a symptom of a sickness on the part of the philosophers 0 He asks rhetorically whether wisdom embodied in his own approach is excited by the scent of rotting meat 0 His task then is to discover the sources of the philosophers antilife attitude Instinct and Happiness 0 Nietzsche analyzes the case of Socrates to uncover the origin of the antilife attitude 0 He understood Socrates to be symptomatic of an impending decline in Greek civilization 0 Every civilization including the Greek is healthy when the happiness of its peo ple is the product of instinct o The Greek civilization was becoming sick because its instincts were at war with one another producing a decadent state 0 Socrates recognized this sickness in himself when he agreed that he contained all bad cravings within him 0 He claimed to have mastered these cravings by using reason as a tool of control 0 His formula was reason 2 virtue happiness The Futility of Reason 0 Later Greek philosophers embraced Socrates s advocacy of reason as a tyrannical force that can being instinct under contro o In an ascendant civilization as was the Greek before Socrates excessive use of reason was considered bad manners o Socrates used reason in the form of dialectical argument as a weapon against his enemies 0 He was able to humiliate them but he never succeeded in convincing them 0 In general reason is able to suppress instincts but it is not able to eliminate them 0 Nietzsche speculates that Socrates recognized his inability to overcome his sick ness and willingly embraced death 0 And so reason in general is no cure for a declining civilization The Idiosyncracies of the Philosophers o Philosophers are idiosyncratic in that their views are not held by the great mass of peop e 0 Nietzsche discusses two idiosyncracies of the philosophers Their hostility to history and more generally to becoming Their confusion of what comes rst with what comes last 0 The rst idiosyncracy is manifest in their view that the senses bear false testi mony of becoming whereas reason reveals the truth of being 0 The second idiosyncracy gives rise to the concept of a cause of itself which is the philosophers conception of God 0 Nietzsche views both of these idiosyncracies as symptoms of the decadance of the philosophers Becoming and Being o The consensus of the philosophers is that the senses lie by presenting plurality and change An exception is Heraclitus who thought that the senses lie by presenting objects as uni ed and persisting o The senses are said to present only appearances to which is opposed unchang ing being or reality o On this view the role of the body is degraded to the point that it too is regarded as being unreal although it has the nerve to behave as if it were real 0 According to Nietzsche the body and its senses are extremely revelatory and what they reveal is the basis of science 0 Reason on the other hand tunis features of the dynamic world revealed by the senses into conceptual mummies sucking the life out of everything it touches o The God of the philosophers is itself a conceptual mummy a completely empty concept of the most real being This abstraction comes at the end of the process by which reason falsi es the presentations of the senses 0 Yet the philosophers think that the most real being is the starting point of all reality 0 It is supposed to be the starting point because the most real being is said to be the cause of itself 0 This inversion occurs because being is more highly valued than is becoming o The philosophers claim that what is less valuable can only come from what is more valuable so being must be the origin of becoming Nietzsche claims that society has paid dearly for taking seriously the mental distortions of sickly webspinners Language and Being o The inversion of the priority of being over becoming has its roots in language The error of being has on its side every word every sentence we speak The fundamental unit of language is the subject eg in Aristotle where all else is in or said of a subject 0 This leads to a metaphysics of things which act 0 The original subject is the I which is said to will 0 This relation of enduring subject to transitory action is projected onto all of re ty39 0 Once a real world of enduring things is set up philosophers discover that we can be certain of it through reason in a way we could never be certain through the senses of becoming The Rise and Fall of the Real World 0 Nietzsche recounts the development of the relation of real to apparent o In Plato the real world is accessible to the wise and virtuous 0 Christianity then claims that the real world the realm of God is attainable only in another life 0 For Kant the real world is only an ideal which gives us some consolation for our existence in the world of appareances 0 As science develops it is realized that the real world no longer has relevance to our lives at all 0 Enlightened modern people reject the real world altogether and with the ap parent world since there is no longer any contrast to be made Dealing With the Passions 0 Human passions in and of themselves are stupid and must be dealt with 0 Christianity on behalf of those who are weak of will declares the passions to be the enemy and seeks to eradicate them 0 Thus it tunis against sensuality and even life itself 0 The best way to deal with the passions is spiritualize them as when sensuality is tunied to love 0 This option requires dealing with the passions intelligently but Christianity has waged war against the intellect o In trying to destroy the passions Christianity promotes quietude but Nietzsche holds that we need opposition in order to achieve anything worthwhile Naturalistic Morality 0 Nietzsche argues in favor of a healthy morality It is exempli ed by ripeness and mastery in the midst of doing creating working willing o A healthy morality must be naturalistic built upon natural instincts and not aiming to destroy them 0 Both the antinaturalistic Christian morality and the kind Nietzsche advocates place some kind of value on lifeiagainst it or for it 0 But valuation itself is merely a symptom of the kind of life one is living 0 It is naive and bigoted to say that people should be one way or another 0 The naturalistic moralist the immoralist to Christianity does not fall into this trap but nds value even in the life of the priest Causality o Morality and religion are based on a confusion of cause with effect Virtue is the effect not the cause of happiness Vice is the effect not the cause of degeneracy o The root of the confusion is a mistaken conception of how causality works 0 We take as a model of causality an act of the human will on the basis of a motive 0 But in fact in the intenial world will and motive simply accompany the production of an act rather than cause it 0 We invent these imaginary causes in order to explain our pleasant and unpleas ant feelings in a way that appears to give us some measure of control over them 0 This is the basis of religion where virtue beings about pleasant feelings and vice unpleasant ones Free Will 0 Free will is an invention of theologians who want people to feel responsible for their actions 0 This results in a feeling of guilt which religious leaders use as an instrument of subjugation o The doctrine of free will depends on making will and motive into causal agents which is an error 0 The healthy morality of the naturalist seeks to purge guilt from the world 0 No one is in fact responsible for what they are and there is no goal of life im posed on us There is nothing that could rule measure compare judge our being 0 By denying God the immoralist denies responsibility and in this way the world is redeemed The Original Immoralists 0 As has been noted Nietzsche claimed that the philosophical doctrines of Socrates Plato and the later Greek philosophers are symptoms of the decline of their civ ilization o In earlier times the Greeks exempli ed a healthy naturalistic morality o This morality is to be found in the cult of the god Dionysis Hegel G J Mattey Winter 2008 Philosophy 151 Philosophy and its History 0 Hegel was the rst modern philosopher to have taken the history of philosophy to be central to own philosophy Aristotle had taken the common opinions of earlier philosophers as his startingpoint in doing metaphysics o The achievements of the philosophers are not individual achievements but rather are manifestations of the spirit of their time 0 At Hegel s point in history the intellectual development of humanity had reached the point where all fundamental knowledge had been attained 0 So Hegel s philosophy represents the nal resting place of philosophical think ing 0 In his Lectures on the History of Philosophy Hegel set out to show how all previous philosophical thinking was incorporated into his own The History of Spirit 0 A fundamental philosophical notion is Hegel is that of spirit Geist 0 Spirit is opposed to nature in that it is thinking while nature is not 0 But spirit is like nature in that it is a kind of totality rather than being an individ ual mind or thinking thing 0 The development of philosophy is the work of spirit Spirit attempts to know itself In the process spirit transforms itself 0 The history of philosophy is the history of the attempts at selfknowledge and the consequent development of spirit in time 0 Each phase of history preserves all that has come before but transforms it into a new orm Phases of the History of Philosophy 0 The history of philosophy can be divided into three phases The Greek The philosophy of the middle ages The modem philosophy 0 Greek philosophy developed the main philosophical categories and medieval philosophy applied them in the context of Roman Catholicism o The Protestant Reformation led by Luther highlighted the free thought of the individual 0 The problem for modeni philosophy is how individual thought subjectivity is related to being in general Realism and Idealism o The goal of modem philosophy is to unify thought and being 0 The opposition may be overcome in one of two ways Realism Idealism o In realism being is independent of thought and is comprehended by it through senseperception Physical nature is united with thought insofar as perceptual observation is generalized to universal laws which re ect the universal character of abstract thinking Society is understood through the discovery of the basis of rights in indi vidual human beings o In idealism being which is the content of thinking is found in thought itself a p ori The Oppositions to be Overcome o The project of unifying thought and being requires reconciliation of three kinds of opposition Knowledge and its object Good and evil Freedom and necessity 0 Being as the ultimate object of human knowledge is God and so the task is to show how knowledge of God can be established a prio o The apparent evil in the realm of being must be explained away given the result for thought that God exists and is good 0 It is known through thought that humans are selfdetermining in their actions but God knows all that will take place and the mechanisms of the natural world appear deterministic Modern Philosophy Before Kant o The problem of modem philosophy is to reconcile the in nite being of God with the nite individuality of human beings The systems of Descartes Spinoza and Malebranche aimed at this reconciliation but failed in their own way 0 Locke and his English followers began from experience and therefore did not have the means to understand in nite being 0 Leibniz rightly held being for thought to be the essence of truth but began from the inadequate starting point of individuality Wolff philosophized in German and displaced Aristotelian philosophy with mod eni philosophy but he did so from a largely empirical point of view 0 Those following Wolff slid entirely into empiricism and abandoned metaphysics Kant s Philosophy 0 In opposition to empiricism Kant sought to establish the universality and neces sity of metaphysical judgments o In so doing he united the forms of thought with the object of thought but the object is only the nite phenomenon not in nite being God 0 The unity he sought has three moments Thesis the beinginitself of the object of consciousness Antithesis The beingforself of consciousness the subject Synthesis The unity of beinginitself and beingforself of subject and object 0 But Kant fails to attain the synthesis in a consistent way Consciousness knows its objects only as they are for consciousness leaving beinginitself outside the scope of the laws it brings to phenomena Fichte s Philosophy 0 Fichte tried to unite the opposing moments beingforself and beinginitself 0 He begins as does Descartes with the certainty of beingforself of the existence of consciousness o The existence of consciousness is the single principle on which all knowledge is based 0 Then the task is to derive all the determinate content of consciousness from con sciousness itself 0 Since the content of consciousness is generated by consciousness itself there is unity between the subject consciousness and the object selfgenerated con tent Thus Fichte is an idealist 0 But his idealism is subjective the object is only an object for consciousness and is not a being in itself so Kant s problem is not solved Schelling s Philosophy 0 Schelling began from the standpoints of Fichte and Kant but he eventually put forward a distinctive account of the unity of subject and object 0 He took a uni ed subjectobject as his starting point 0 We can view the subj ectobj ect from the standpoint of the subject or the stand point of the object o This is similar to Spinoza s substance which can be conceived under the attribute of thought or under the attribute of extension 0 The problem with this approach is that it begins where it should end The task of philosophy is to show how a uni ed allencompassing subj ect obj ect God emerges from antithetical opposites Hegel s System 0 Hegel attempted to unite all of philosophy under a single system 0 The system is broken down into three parts Logic which involves primarily the concepts of metaphysics Philosophy of Nature Philosophy of Spirit o The system is laid out in three volumes of Hegel s Encyclopedia of the Philo sophical Sciences in Outline 0 In the Introduction Hegel explains the main lines of his system and how they are related to earlier philosophy Philosophy 0 To understand what philosophy is we must begin with an undeveloped concep tion of its objects 0 Put formally the object of philosophy is truth which concenis the existence and determination of its objects 0 The supreme source of truth is God and so philosophy like religion has God as its primary object The secondary objects of philosophy are nature and the human mind both of which are nite 0 Philosophy tries to understand two relational aspects of nature and mind How they relate to each other How they are related to their truth in God 0 In order to accomplish its end philosophy must study these objects thinkinglyf through concepts Begn e Philosophical and Unphilosophical Thinking 0 Not all thinking study of objects is philosophical 0 There are two quite distinct modes of thinking Original active thinking which appears in the guise of feeling intuition and conception which give rise to law religion and ethics Philosophical thinking which proceeds through concepts and results in conceptual knowledge 0 There is a prejudice according to which feeling and thought are opposite o If this is so then philosophical knowledge of God would supplant religious feel ing 0 But feeling can be permeated by thought 0 Philosophical thinking is metathinking thinking about thinking and hence its conclusions about God are not in con ict with religious feeling Philosophical Thinking and Religious Belief 0 Some philosophers hold that one must prove philosophically that God exists be fore one can believe in God s existence 0 Proofs of God s existence are carried out through philosophical metathinking o This is not the kind of thinking that is involved in religious feeling and hence is not required for religious belief o It would be absurd to claim that one must understand all the scienti c properties of food in order to be able to eat 0 Likewise it would be absurd to claim that one must understand philosophically that God exists and what God s nature in order to be able to believe in God The Form and Content of Thought 0 One and the same object may be thought in different ways 0 The object is the content of the thinking and the way of thinking the object is the form that the objects have 0 The same object as content may have the form of Feeling Intuition Image Conception A combination of these 0 Because the form is not separable from the content different thoughts of the same object may appear to be thoughts of different objects 0 All of these forms can be called ideas or conceptions Conceptual Thinking o Philosophical thinking operates with concepts rather than conceptions o Conceptions are only metaphors for concepts A painting of God has God as its obj ect but it represents God in a determi nate sensuous form rather than an abstract conceptual form The conception of a leaf as being green is a kind of image of being and individuality o The dif culty of pure abstract thinking is a reason why people think that philos ophy is unintelligible 0 Another reason is that when one thinks philosophically one is unable to nd the object of thought since there are no conceptions to illustrate the concepts The Justi cation of Philosophical Thinking 0 Philosophy must prove to ordinary consciousness the need for its peculiar brand of thinking 0 To religious consciousness it must prove two things That it knows the truth of God purely through the use of concepts That its results are justi ed in cases where they con ict with religious con ceptions 0 People believe that the purely conceptual nature of philosophical thinking allows anyone to engage in it or criticize it simply by thinking without any training 0 But purely conceptual thinking is not so easily obtained 0 The claim that humans have intellectual intuition made by Jacobi promotes the mistaken notion that philosophical insight can be gained without bother Philosophy and Reality 0 Philosophy aims at truth and its object must be what is actual o The concepts with which philosophy deals must be in harmony with what is real the world 0 We rst come into contact with the world through inner and outer experience 0 We learn to distinguish what is real from what is merely imaginary 0 Since the real object is the same in both the experienced and the conceputalized form the concepts of philosophy must harmonize with empirically real objects 0 Because there is reason in the world of experience this reason must be brought into harmony with the reason which we are conscious of using when we do philosophy Real is Rational o In his Philosophy of Right Hegel had equated the rational with the real What is real is rational What is rational is real 0 Critics of these theses can nd no support in religion or in philosophy 0 The doctrine of divine governance of the world is central to religion 0 Philosophers should know that God and God alone is actual which implies the unity of the rational and the real 0 They should also know that this kind of actuality must be distinguished from what exists merely contingently 0 Thus the doctrine of the rationality of the real does not apply to contingent beings which are not necessarily rational The Rational is Real 0 The identi cation of the real with the rational is criticized from the other direc tion on the grounds that the rational character of concepts disquali es them from being real Concepts are merely inventions of the mind Concepts are ideal and thus are too excellent to be real Concepts have no power to produce reality 0 A particularly tempting argument is that the understanding determines what ought to be but that reality does not measure up to this imperative and hence is irra tional 0 But the oughts of the understanding are conceptions only and not concepts 0 They apply only to conditions in the experienced world that are only the super cial surface of actuality Empiricism 0 Philosophy after Luther tunied toward empirical investigation of the phenomenal world 0 It sought to nd universality and lawfulness in an apparently disconnected mass of contingent objects 0 This universality and lawfuness were seen as being based in the human mind and giving content to the phenomenal world 0 The outcome of these investigations is then called philosophy Newton s natural philosophy of physical nature Grotius s philosophy of inteniational law The new science of political economy economics 0 But this empirical study falls short 0 It excludes God freedom and spirit due to their in nite content 0 But in fact mind no s is the cause of the world and the feelings of ethics and religion are based on thought Philosophy and the Sciences 0 The empirical sciences cannot do without speculative philosophy 0 The empirical method suffers from two defects The universal and lawful relations it discovers are merely associations and not real connections It begins with given data rather than deducing the data from a higher prin ciple o Philosophical metathinking remedies these defects by supplying further cate gories o This kind of thinking respects the results of the empirical sciences but expands it in a way that allows it to be complete Explaining Philosophical Thinking o The way in which philosophical thinking possesses necessity and its claim to know God or the essence of things must be explained 0 But the explanation is philosophical and therefore cannot be given prior to doing philosophy except by making assumptions 0 Kant s approach was to engage in a criticism of the powers of the human intellect o This approach has the same problem in that one must carry out the investigation using the very faculties that are being investigated 0 Nor can we reach an explanation in the manner of Reinhold by beginning with a kind of philosophy that is merely hypothetical and hoping that it will eventually discard the hypotheses Contradictions as an Obstacle to MetaThinking o The need for philosophy arises from the fact that thought takes itself as its object o In the deepest sense the mind comes to itself through the examination of thought since thought is the principle of the mind 0 In this metathinking the mind becomes ensnared in contradictions and so is unable to come to itself 0 The mind needs to overcome these contradictions o It can do so by retreating from its goal of using thinking to understand thinking 0 One way to do this recognized by Plato is to abandon thinking as a means of discovery and to embrace immediate knowledge Philosophy as Empirical o Historically philosophy begins with what is discovered in experience and infers from it a supersensible reality God 0 We might say that the sensible world is immediately given while our knowl edge of the supersensible depends on that of the sensible 0 We can then say that what we know of the supersensible is mediated by our knowledge of the sensible o In mediation a higher point of view is attained and there is a negative attitude toward the immediate data from which mediation began o If we claim that what is mediated is also conditioned by the original object then philosophy is a merely empirical science 0 The negative attitude would then be ungrateful since it treats negatively what is the condition of the mediated object Philosophy asA Priori 0 Philosophy can also begin with itself as the immediate given and the thought of itself as the mediated object o The concepts of philosophy are then a p ori and are as secure as can be due to their origins in ourselves 0 There is a danger though of the concepts being empty formalism if they are divorced entirely from experience All is being Parmenides Subject and object are identical Fichte and Schelling 0 Experience is the basis for growth and advance in philosophy Its universality and lawfulness contributed by thought are proper for ob jects of philosophy The fact that thought has made a contribution removes its immediacy The History of Philosophy 0 The history of philosophy seems to consist in a number of systems that are only accidentally related to one another 0 But the development of philosophy has always been guided by a unitary living mind or spirit Each system is only a stage in the development of the single system of philosophy The principles Which guide each system are a branches of a single Whole Philosophy at any one point includes and is the result of the previous sys tems o The last system at any given time if it is really philosophical Will be the most adequate o If one system contains all the others philosophy cannot be criticized because of the diversity of systems The Idea 0 Within a philosophical system there is the same process that governs the histori cal development of successive systems 0 This development takes place internally in thinking Without reference to any external historical facts 0 The endproduct of philosophical thinking is an Idea It is the product of free and genuine thought It is concrete rather than abstract 0 If the Idea is completely universal it is the absolute Idea 0 An Idea is universal It provides unity to various moments Which give rise to it 0 An Idea is concrete The moments that gave rise for it are retained rather than separated from it Philosophy as a System 0 Philosophy is scienti c only if it is in the form of a system 0 The contents of unsystematic philosophy are contingent and express only the personal peculiarities of the mind of the author 0 The only way a content can be justi ed is in its relation to a Whole to Which it stands as a moment 0 A particular principle cannot be a system and thus cannot be scienti c o Genuine philosophy has as one of its principles that it must include all principles 0 A system can be seen as a circle of circles Each part of the system is itself a philosophical Whole But each part goes beyond its limits and forms a Wider circle The Idea can be seen as comprising the shucture of the system itself 11 The Encyclopedia of Philosophy 0 Philosophy is a single single science but it may be exhibited as a Whole com posed of parts 0 This is the method of exposition of an encyclopedia o In an ordinary as opposed to philosophical encyclopedia the parts form a mere aggregate Without a principle of unity o All partial sciences are excluded from an encyclopedia of philosophy Mere aggregates of information eg philology Quasisciences Which depend entirely on convention eg heraldry The positive portions of true sciences Which rest on rational principles 0 Generally something is positive When its basis is not found in pure thought The Positive Element in the Sciences and Philosophy 0 Sciences are positive in three ways They deal With contingencies Which are not determined by reason but by chance They deal With the nite Without regard to how it is contained in the in nite They have heterogeneous grounds of cognition inference feeling faith authority based on internal and external intuition 0 Philosophy is positive in the third way When it is based on data from anthropol ogy psychology or some other empirical source 0 Science and philosophy can shed some of its positivity if they are able to bring various different kinds of phenomena under universal principles The result is an external picture of or metaphor for the relevant concept Returning to the Beginning 0 The starting point of philosophy is the self as object for the self 0 This beginning is not a subjective presupposition but rather is the product of a free act of thought that gives itself as object 0 At the start of philosophy the self is an immediate object for itself 0 At the end of philosophy the object is a result that is mediated 0 Yet the result of philosophy is the same object With Which philosophy began o In this way philosophy resembles a completed circle Which ends at the starting point The Concept of the Concept of Philosophy 0 There is a beginning in philosophy only relative to the person who studies it and not to philosophy as a science 0 The rst concept the beginner has of the science implies a separation between the object of the science and the beginner studying the science 0 The goal of the beginner is to understand the concept of the science 0 If the beginner is successful then he will have attained the standpoint of the science itself 0 Insofar as the individual takes the standpoint of the science it can be said that the science has gained a concept of its own concept 0 To do so is the single aim action and goal of philosophy 0 Philosophy has returned to itself and found satisfaction in itself The Divisions of Philosophy 0 Because the system of philosophy is a whole a division given before the system is exhibited is merely preliminary o The preliminary division is based on the Idea that is the source of the unity of the system 0 So we can make a preliminary division by noting the relations in which the Idea itself may stand Logic the Idea in itself and for itself Philosophy of Nature the Idea in its otherness Philosophy of Mind the Idea returning to itself from its otherness o The differences have to do only with the media in which the Idea is exhibited o It is misleading to present divisions of philosophy as if there were a single object rendered into parts 0 Each division is related as a moment in an integrated system The Phenomenology of Spirit 0 Hegel s rst major philosophical work was The Phenomenology ofSpirit 1807 o This book is the most famous and in uential of all of Hegel s writings o It can be seen as a preliminary investigation that sets the stage for the system of the Encyclopedia o The study of spirit in the book is a phenomenology in the sense that it charts the appearance of consciousness as it assumes many forms 0 The description is not historical but rather is based on the kinds of relations a knowing subject can have to its objects 0 The ultimate outcome is absolute knowing in which consciousness has reached the maximum stage of its development and comes to know itself in its highest form The Stages of Spirit s Development 0 The following is a bare outline of the forms of consciousness with the object of consciousness listed in parentheses Consciousness something other than consciousness SelfConsciousness the individual person Reason nature Spirit the ethical community Religion the religious community Absolute Knowing the consciousness that has assumed the prior forms 0 We will be focusing on part of the development of SelfConsciousness Consciousness o Consciousness always is consciousness of and thus has an object 0 We who are ourselves conscious must begin our study of consciousness by observing it in its immediate relation to an object The immediate object of consciousness can only be described as a particular this here and now 0 Since any particular can be a hisi etc the thought of the this is really uni versa 0 Thus consciousness now has the universal as its obj ect and the universal presents itself in objects of perception as properties of them Perception presents properties indifferently but to grasp the obj ect we must nd the essential properties which are the objects of understanding SelfConsciousness and Desire 0 The result of the stage of consciousness is that it cannot nd truth in objects conceived as different from itself 0 Insofar as consciousness can grasp objects it is only because they are objects for consciousness 0 Thus consciousness nds itself in its objects so that the object of consciousness turns out to be consciousness itself 0 The attitude of consciousness toward the other in which it nds itself is to negate its otherness and becomes one with it This attitude is desire The object is considered only negatively as what is not one s self 0 By unifying itself with the other in which it nds itself the self would unify itself The Emergence of Spirit 0 The object of desire in which consciousness nds itself is a living thing 0 Experience shows that the living other is independent of one s self 0 The self cannot of itself achieve unity with what is independent of it o The self can attain unity with the other only if the other attains unity with it 0 So the unity of selfconsciousness with itself can be attained only through its unity with another selfconsciousness 7 o Selfconsciousness achieves its satisfaction only through another selfconsciousness Paragraph 175 o The being selfconscious for another selfconsciousness is the rst emergence of spirit I that is We and We that is 1 Paragraph 177 Acknowledgement o The unity of one selfconsciousness with another can be attained only insofar as each selfconsciousness acknowledges the other as being selfconsciousness o The acknowledgement has three double senses o The self has come outside itself The self has lost itself in the other The self does away with the otheniess of the other by seeing itself there 15 o In doing away with the otherness of the other by seeing itself there The self does away with the other The self does away with itself 0 In the process the self returns to itself The self gets itself back from the other The self lets the other go free Reciprocity o The process of nding one s self in the other abolishing its otherness and re gaining the self is carried out by both selfconsciousnesses involved 0 Each is what it is only through the other 0 The acknowledgement is mutual acknowledgement o The process will be studied in the progression in which it appears for self consciousness The rst way in which the opposition between the self and the other self appears is extreme neither self acknowledges itself in the other 0 The process will end in the overcoming of the inequality and mutual recognition of the two selfconsciousnesses as equals Life and Death 0 If there are two selves which encounter each other merely as another selfconsciousness they ght each other to the death 0 Each self regards itself only as selfconsciousness and thereby is willing to stake its natural life 0 Each self seeks the death of the other because the life of the other means no more to it than does its own life to itself 0 The staking of one s life is a necessary condition for the development of freedom 0 If one of the combatants is killed the goal of eliminating the other is achieved 0 But without the other as a selfconsciousness the self loses its only means of nding itself which requires the acknowledgement of the other 0 The doing away with does not preserve what is done away with and the negation is only abstract Master and Servant One outcome of the lifeanddeath combat is the recognition that life is essential to selfconsciousness Another outcome is that victorious selfconsciousness is purely for itself while the vanquished is for the other selfconsciousness The independent selfconsciousness is the master and the dependent selfconcsiousness is the servant The master relates himself to things through the servant Things are an other for the servant who works on it because he cannot annihilate it The master is able to enjoy the bene ts of the things worked upon by the servant in a way he could not when it was merely the object of desire But because the servant is subordinate the master does not recognize himself in him The Mastery of the Servant It is in fact the servant who is able to achieve the acknowledgement of himself in the master The master is what he is only through the work of the servant and is not self suf cient Fear of death at the hands of the master shakes up the servant giving him an awareness beyond his immediate interests The discipline of service and obedience directs this consciousness to work on objects In improving the object of work the servant attains mastery over it The servant nds himself in the object and hence becomes selfconscious through it Reason in History The rest of the Phenomenology treats many forms of consciousness leading ul timately to spirit which knows itself in an absolute way In The Philosophy of History Hegel shows the progress of spirit as it occurred in the actual unfolding of historical events The Introduction to those lectures known as Reason in History makes Hegel s case for the claim that history is guided by a rational worldspirit l7 Reason is the law of the world and i i i in world history things have come about rationally 0 That the real is rational was proved in his systematic philosophy 0 But it is also proved in that the study of history reveals the rationality of its progress No s and Divine Providence 0 Hegel s claim is that conscious mind not mere rationally comprehensible laws of nature are the goveniing force in history 0 Anaxagoras rst pronounced that reason no s rules the world But he did not show how reason rules the world 0 The doctrine of religion is that the world is ruled by a divine providence How peoples and nations are ruled by divine providence must be proved not merely acceped on faith 0 The exposition of divine providence presupposes knowledge of God the denial of which was a prejudice of Hegel s time o This exposition would explain the role of evil in the world and thus would be a theodicy History and Spirit 0 The history of the world encompasses both the history of nature and the history of spirit 0 Although nature plays a role in history it is of interest only insofar as it is related to the history of spirit 0 The realm of spirit consists in what is produced by man 0 Spirit and nature are united in the human nature which is a universal that applies to all human beings 0 Showing the role of spirit in history requires the explanation of three things What spirit is considered abstractly How spirit realizes its ends in history The form of the realization of its endsithe state Consciousness of Freedom 0 The essence of spirit is freedom through which all its properties exist Spirit is selfconscious and what is selfconscious exists for itself and within itself 0 However spirit realizes its implicit freedom comes to be known only gradually through the course of history Among the Asian peoples only the despotic ruler is known to be free The Greeks and Romans did not recognize the basis of freedom and only some were known to be free The Germanic peoples through Christianity recognize that all are free and that freedom of the spirit is the essence of human nature 0 Knowledge of freedom emerges unevenly and because slavery exists knowledge of freedom remains incomplete o The nal purpose of the world is the actualization of the freedom recognized by spirit Pursuit of Private Aims Produces General Misery 0 Although an internal phenomenon freedom realizes itself through external means 0 The greatest springs of action are natural impulses which are closest to the core of human nature Passions Private aims Satisfaction of sel sh desires 0 People do not act much on the basis of universal purposes or morality and even when they do things often turn out badly for them 0 The result of the prevelance of natural impulse over law is an ugly spectacle of human behavior History is the slaughterbench at which the happiness of peoples the wis dom of states and the virtue of individuals have been sacri ced 0 Philosophical history must show the end for which all this has occurred Freedom and Passion 0 The most basic explanatory principle of human action is that people act only insofar as their action serves some interest that they have 0 When all the desires and powers of an individual are concentrated in a single interest it may be called a passion 0 Every great accomplishment in the world is the result of passion o The goal of philosophical history is then to show how passion serves the interest of the idea of freedom 0 People condemn actions based on passions 0 But the basis of praise or blame lies in the aim of the passion and the content of the conviction which accompanies it The State 0 There are two essential elements in carrying out the purpose found in history The complex of passions which move it forward The idea of freedom toward which it is moving 0 The union of the passions and the idea is individual liberty in a state 0 The optimal state is one in which the private interests of the citizens coincides with the public interest of the state Each is realized and grati ed in the other 0 But this kind of state is not the conscious aim of people from the beginning of history 0 The development of the optimal state is necessary but it can only occur through the free acts of people acting in their private interests The Tools and Means of the World Spirit 0 It might be thought that actions based on private interests serve only to further private ends 0 Individual actors are not aware of any greater purpose that their actions would serve 0 But such actions are in fact the tools and means by which spirit accomplishes its higher and broader purpose 0 This is initially a hypothesis but it will be demonstrated in the course of the investigation of world history o The realization of the universal objective purpose of spirit is necessary while that of the particular subjective purpose of the individual takes place freely o The union of the objective and the subjective the subjectmatter of logic From Private Ends to Morality 0 Actions which are undertaken to ful ll private ends have consequences beyond those ends 0 Sometimes the consequences tuni against the ends of the agent A person committing arson as revenge may end up being punished 0 People are rational and as such they recognize that generally their ends are best served by the creation of a state with its universal laws and customs o The laws and customs of society in tuni de ne individual morality One acts morally by ful lling one s de ned role in society 0 Thus the consequence of intention to ful ll private ends is a social system which constrains the actions of the individual in the pursuit of those ends Progress Toward the Ideal State 0 Since the state de nes the ethical life of its members its replacement would constitute a new moral order 0 The ethical life of the state is unstable due to the fact that the laws and customs are generally in con ict with individual ends 0 When a state is in decline its members may recognize new possibilities of laws and custom which con ict with the existing order 0 When the existing state is replaced by a new state that embodies these possibili ties one moral system replaces another 0 By this process there is a progression of states which approaches the ideal of a state in which the public interest and private interests are in harmony WorldHistorical Individuals 0 The recognition of a possible new moral order and its actualization by making it the object of their passion is the work of worldhistorical individuals Julius Caesar overthrew the Roman government in part to satisfy his ambi tion for power but also instinctively to create a new social order 0 The worldhistorical individual does not realize that he is serving the purpose of the worldspirit 0 He does however recognize what needs to be done in his situation and he has the passion that allows them take on and defeat the existing social order 0 Because these heroes are embodying the spirit of the world they easily nd followers who feel that spirit in them The Fate of the Hero 0 The worldhistorical individual attains some satisfaction for his success 0 But he does not attain happiness because his whole life is expended in the dif cult pursuit of his ruling passion Happiness can be found only in private life 0 A free person will rejoice in the existence of the hero 0 Envious people will accuse the hero of immorality because his actions are moti vated by his passion o It is true that the hero s actions contravene the laws and customs of society and create great damage and in this sense are immoral 0 But this kind of immorality should not be the basis of condemnation as it is necessary for the advancement to a new higher morality The Cunning of Reason 0 The idea of freedom toward whose actualization history progresses is a univer sa 0 Movement toward freedom takes place only through the passion of individuals 0 We can say that in history reason is cunning The realization of the idea is carried out by existing individuals Only those individuals have to suffer the consequences of realizing the idea 0 The individual is not however to be taken as merely a means for the realization of the idea of freedom 0 The person is an end only insofar as he contains the divine within him which is independent of the vagaries of individual human existence Freedom Morality and the State 0 The state is the union of the particular subjective individual will with the uni versal will of the reason that governs the world 0 The individual enjoys his freedom in the state insofar as it knows believes and wills in conformity with the state 0 This freedom is positive 0 It must be contrasted with the negative freedom made possible by the state The state allows a limited space of freedom for the individual by constrain ing the actions of others Only the common will has moral signi cance and not the capricious will of the individual 0 The state is the manifestation of the world spirit and it includes religion science and art as well as political institutions The Individual and the State 0 All the value man has all spiritual reality he has only through the state 0 Spiritual reality is consciousness of one s own essence o The essence of the individual is to be found in a rationality that is universal 0 As the state is individual it expresses the essence of its citizens 0 Thus the laws of the state ow from the essence of those who would follow them 0 Our freedom consists in our recognition of the law as expressing our own essence o This recognition has been lost sight of in modem society where people under stand morality in terms of their own convictions about how things ought to be Modern Errors Concerning the State 0 There are two common errors in presentday thinking about the state 0 The rst is that men are free by nature and give up their freedom through subjugation to the state 0 This freedom is said to exist in a state of nature that does not exist and has never existed 0 But existing in a chaotic state of nature would lead people to aspire to true positive freedom which restrains the negative freedom of the subjective will 23 o The second error is that the state has the form of a patriarchical family Theocracies have this form with the patriarch being a religious leader 0 The error here is that a family is based on a bond of feeling among kin while a state unites strangers under law The State and The People 0 If the state is based on the negative freedom of the subjective will then its basis must be the consent of the governed o In that case all decisions would have to be made by lhe people as a whole and there would be no use for a constitution 0 But in practice goveniment and administration are necessary which requires a constitution even in a democracy 0 This implies a distinction between those who goveni and those who are gov enied o The result is a tension between two factors The need for power and strength on the side of the goveniment The demand that as much power as possible lie in the hands of the people Forms of Government 0 The balance of power between the goveniment and the people is re ected in various forms of goveniment Despotism Monarchy Aristocracy The Republic Democracy 0 There can be various versions of each type and mixtures of the various types 0 The question arises as to which is the best form of goveniment o Theoretically the republic is the best form 0 But in fact the form of goveniment of a people is determined by the historical circumstances of that people 0 At the present time the rational form of goveniment is a constitutional monarchy Art Religion and Philosophy 0 The state is the union of the particular subjective will and the universal objective idea of freedom It is the foundation of all cultural aspects of a people including art law morality religion and science 0 The highest form of this union is religion 0 In religious feeling the individual is concerned only with the universal and not with any particular objects in the world 0 Religion is the knowledge of the union of the objective and subjective 0 Art represents the universal sensuously and its highest form is the representation of God which is represented in feeling by religion 0 Above all these forms is philosophy which conceptually represents what is true Religion and the State 0 Religion understands the idea of God in one of two ways relative to the relation of the subjective and the objective As separate God as separately existing lord of the universe As united God as the universal soul of all particulars 0 It is in the second sense that the idea of God is i i i the general fundament of a people 0 The state is based on religion as it is the embodiment of the unity of universal and particular subjective and objective 0 In fact every state arises originally from the religion of a people The pagan religions of the Greeks and Romans Catholicism Protestantism Misconceptions About Religion and the State 0 There are several misconceptions about the relation between religion and the state 0 One misconception is that religion serves the state by encouraging an attitude of devotion to duty but not so strong that religious duty can be turned against the state But this view falsely presupposes that the state exists prior to religion 25 Kant s Grounding for the Metaphysics 0f Morals G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 The Division of Philosophical Labor 0 Kant generally endorses the ancient Greek division of philosophy into three branches Physics Natural philosophy Ethics Moral philosophy Logic 0 Logic is concerned only With the forms of thinking 0 Physics and ethics are concerned With objects and the laws to Which those objects are subject Laws of nature physics Laws of freedom ethics 0 Both physics and ethics have empirical and pure a priori components 0 Pure moral philosophy is Wholly cleared of anything Which can only be empir ical 389 Pure Moral Philosophy 0 Kant argues from the common idea of duty and of moral laws that moral laws must originate a priori in reason 1 If a law is morally valid then it holds for all rational beings Without excep tion E0 If a law holds for all rational beings Without exception then its origin cari not be found in any feature of one kind rational being Which is not shared With all other rational beings Equot If the origin of a law cannot be found in any feature of one kind of rational being Which is not shared With all other rational beings then it lies a p ori in reason itself 4 So if a law is morally valid then its origin lies a p ori in reason itself 0 Pure moral philosophy shows what the moral laws are and how they originate a p ori in reason 0 It is indispensibly necessary because knowledge of moral laws is required for moral goodness What is morally good both conforms to moral laws and is done for the sake of moral laws The Good in Itself 0 Ancient ethicists claimed that the good for the human being is happiness eudae mania however that is to be understood 0 They claimed that virtues and extenial goods are what is conducive to human happiness 0 Kant notes that both the virtues and extenial goods can help us to do bad things 0 Even happiness can lead to bad states such as pride and arrogance o If virtue or happiness go badly it is because the person has a bad will 0 The only way that we can avoid bad actions and bad states is through the exercise of a good will 0 Kant concludes that a good will is the only thing which is good without quali cation or in itself Happiness is good only insofar as one is worthy of it and one is worthy of happiness only by possessing a good will Moral Worth 0 A good will is a will that acts purely on the basis of duty 0 Only such acts have moral worth An act that conforms to one s duty but which is performed for some other reason has no moral value A merchant charges a fair price because it will build a loyal clientele 0 Sometimes one s duties con ict with one s inclinations or sel sh purposes Ihelp a person I do not like and who may even do me harm at some later time o Acts performed for duty and against inclination and sel sh purpose have the highest moral worth 0 Even promoting happiness has moral worth only insofar as it done out of duty Acting from Duty 0 An action that is done out of duty is an action which is done out of respect for e law 0 A dutiful action like all other rational actions proceeds according to a maxim 0 Most maxims that motivate actions show us how to attain our ends When I my house is unhealthfully unclean and I want to maintain my health I act on the maxim Clean the house 0 The maxim of a dutiful action is Follow the law even if my inclinations are thereby thwarted 0 So an action which has moral worth will performed solely in order to follow the law Following the Law 0 To sum up The only unquali ed good is a good will A good will acts only from duty Acting from duty is acting in order to follow the law 0 But what is the law which a good will strives to follow 0 Since the law in dutiful actions is indifferent to any of its effects it will be purely formal in character 0 The fundamental formal character of law is its universal application 0 So to follow the law is to act in such a way that one is willing to allow the maxim of acting to be applicable to all rational beings o A good will is a will which acts in a way that it would have every other will act An Example 0 I am in distress and one way to get out of my dire situation is to make a promise that I intend to break 0 I might then act according to the following maxim If there is no other way to get out of trouble make a false promise 0 Acting from such a maxim follows the law only if I am willing to allow this maxim to be applicable universally 0 But I cannot will the universal adoption of the maxim o For then the maxim would be selfdefeating because it would result in a general breakdown in trust in which case either My present lie would not be believed and hence of no help to me or It would be believed but people would be entitled to lie to me in return Why We Need Moral Philosophy 0 The preceding account of goodness is taken from nothing more than the moral cognition of ordinary human reason 0 Ordinary use of reason is suf cient to determine what one ought to do and is available to everyone 0 So it might be thought that the everyday use of reason in its happy simplicity is therefore suf cient for the purposes of morals 0 But a problem lies in the power of our needs and inclination which push us away from strict devotion to duty 0 There results a dialectic in which the demands of duty are met with arguments in favor of the satisfaction of our needs and inclinationsiin favor of happiness 0 To secure their moral principles against these arguments ordinary people must turn to philosophy Moral Concepts Are A Priori 0 Experience cannot reveal a single instance of an action performed purely out of a strict devotion to duty 0 Nonetheless reason commands such actions and we should investigate the ori gin of that command even if it will never be carried out o The command to duty cannot arise from experience because it holds for all rational beings 0 And moral worth cannot be determined from examples since we must rst know what is morally good before we can determine what is a proper example of it 0 Without an a priori moral philosophy we are left with a disgusting mishmash of patchwork observations and halfreasoned principles 0 Showing the a priori origin of moral concepts confers dignity on action from duty which motivates dutiful action Imperatives 0 When the human will acts for reasons it does so by representing objective prin ciples which are called commands o The formula of a command is an imperative and is expressed by an ought Imperatives say that something would be good to do or to refrain from doing 0 Imperatives imply only to human will as a holy will would not act from any thing but objective laws of the good 0 Imperatives command in two ways Hypothetically one should do x in order to accomplish end y Categorically one should do x period 0 Categorical imperatives alone are appropriate to morality 0 We cannot tell from experience whether they are ever obeyed so they must be investigated a prio The Categorical Imperative 0 There is only one way to explain why one should perform an action without taking into account its end The action is one that conforms to a universal law I should do x because doing x conforms to law and not because of any end it might promote 0 So a general form of a categorical imperative is this Act in such a way that the maxim of the action can serve as a universal law 0 Schematically the categorical imperative functions in this way Should I do x Yes if my reason for doing x can be a reason for everyone to do x o This principle for action is now known as a principle of universalizability The Categorical Imperative and Duties o The categorical imperative is a very abstract principle 0 If it is to serve as a moral law governing the actions of rational beings the speci c duties of those beings should be derivable from the imperative itself 0 Kant derives instances of four kinds of duties which are arranged according to the way duties were understood in his time Perfect Imperfect Permits no exceptions Permits exceptions To ourselves Preserve my own life Develop my talents To others Make honest promises Help others 0 In each case a maxim allowing the violation of the duty cannot be universalized An Example Making Honest Promises 0 Perhaps the most famous of these examples is that of a perfect duty to others to make only honest promises to them an example that was examined in the First Section 0 Because the duty is said to be perfect it should admit of no exceptions 0 Thus it is forbidden to make a dishonest promise even if making that promise would help ourself or someone else escape from dif culty 0 A maxim allowing the making a dishonest promise is not universalizable be cause if it were all trust would be destroyed o If all trust is destroyed then making the promise would not serve my interest 0 It is a standard objection to Kant that in some cases such as that of preventing a murder it is permissible to make a false promise Justifying the Categorical Imperative 0 At this point Kant has explained two things How an imperative could be categorical How a categorical imperative can account for all possible kinds of duties 0 But he has yet to prove that there is a categorical imperative that applies to all rational beings o The proof cannot be based on experience given the generality of its application 0 Yet it is tempting to appeal to empirical motives and laws given the dif culty of Justifying objective laws like the categorical imperative a priori Deriving the authority of the categorical imperative to command from its a priori origin 0 The task Will require a step into metaphysics The Ends of Action 0 Ends are What determine the Will to action 0 There are two kinds of ends Objective ends Which depend on motives that are valid for all rational be ings Subjective ends Which depend on desires that are relative to individuals 0 Objective ends are ends in themselves While subjective ends are only means to er en s 0 Only objective ends could be the basis of a categorical imperative If there is a maxim that promotes an end Which all rational beings have such a maxim could be Willed to be a universal law Man as an End in Itself o Kant maintains that every rational being exists as an end in itself Rational beings are called persons inasmuch as their nature already marks them out as ends in themselves 0 An end in itself is an end for every rational being 0 In the speci c case of human beings all humans are ends in themselves and thus ends for every human being 0 So I can universalize the following maxim Treat all other human beings as ends and not as means to some end 0 My reason for treating all humans including myself as ends is a reason for all humans to treat all humans as ends 0 We can then explain the duty of honest promising on the grounds that to promise dishonestly to another is to treat that other person as a means to my own ends Legislating Universal Law 0 The moral law as given in the categorical imperative is not imposed on us from without 0 Instead it is dictated by the rational will itself 0 So given the universal scope of the categorical imperative the rational will dic tates universal law 0 This universal law is independent of any of our special interests 0 Because of its universal legislating activity the will is called its autonomous where nomos 2 law 0 A will which is subject to external laws is heteronomous o Autonomy of the rational will is the only way to explain the a priori origin of the moral law The Kingdom of Ends 0 The concept of an autonomous rational will gives rise to another very fruitful concept that of a kingdom of ends 0 Kant claims that it is possible that there be a systematic union of rational beings under legislation that mandates treating each one as an end 0 Morality can then be understood in terms of a possible kingdom of ends A moral act is one that is based on legislation that makes a kingdom of ends possible 0 Potential membership in a kingdom of ends constitutes human dignity which is intrinsic worth 0 Dignity is beyond all price because what has a price can be replaced by some thing with an equivalent price 0 All the other virtues skill at work wit etc give us only delight which has a price but not intrinsic worth The Good Will 0 In Section One Kant claimed that according to the common conception of moral ity only a good will is good in itself 0 He now connects the concept of a good with the categorical imperative which is the highest principle of morality o A will which is absolutely good is a will whose maxims can be universalized ie a will which acts only on the basis of the categorical imperative 0 An absolutely good will therefore be a will that legislates in the kingdom of ends 0 Such a will is a holy will which is the kind of will a supreme being would have 0 The dignity of the human will lies not in its being subject to the moral law but in its being the source of its own law as an autonomous being Spurious Principles of Morality o All genuine moral principles presuppose the autonomy of the rational will 0 Spurious moral principles presuppose its heteronomy The law goveniing the will is sought in its objects not in itself 0 Such laws can only be hypothetical imperatives 0 They may be based on either Experience or Pure reason Against Empiricism in Ethics 0 Empirical principles of morality promote happiness as an end 0 They may do so in one of two ways As private happiness As a moral feeling that is produced by a special moral sense 0 A principle that promotes private happiness does not distinguish between virtue and Vice 0 If there is a moral feeling promoting it would be superior to promoting private happiness 0 But feelings are variable among people and therefore cannot provide a universal standard for distinguishing right actions from wrong actions Against Rationalism in Ethics 0 Some moral philosophers try to derive moral principles analytically from a con cept of perfection Divine perfection or Ontological perfection maximal degree of reality But a de nite conception of divine perfection can only be constructed in two ways From ourselves in which case we do not need to appeal to divine perfec tion From ideas of domination and vengenace which have no place in morality 0 We have no de nite conception of ontological perfection maximal degree of reality 0 Because it is empty ontological perfection at least does not con ict with moral ity and so it is better 0 It is also better than any empirical concept because it is not corrupted by a connection to experience Rational Man and Natural Man 0 In Section Three Kant discusses the question of how the categorical imperative is related to human beings o If a human being has a rational will it is autonomous and lays down the moral law for itself 0 But human beings exist in the natural world and act in that world according to their desires and inclinations o In order for it to be possible for humans to have an autonomous rational will it must be possible to conceive of them as beings acting independently of their desires and inclinations 0 To do so we must distinguish humans as appearances in nature and as things in themselves that are not subject to natural springs of action 0 Thus our rational will which is the basis of morality must be conceived as a member of an intelligible world in which we would do what in nature we ought to do Aquinas s Summa Theologica G J Mattey Winter 2006 Philosophy 1 Theology 0 According to Thomas Aquinas 12251274 Theology is the study of God Whether God exists What God s attributes are How God is related to created things 0 There are two ways in which theology might be conducted Through the authority of divine revelation Through the use of natural reason 0 If one rejects divine revelation then articles of faith cannot be used as rst prin ciples of theology 0 So natural reason is useful in theology How To Prove That God Exists o The existence of God is not selfevident to human reason If it were then we would know that God exists from his essence But we do not know God s essence o The existence of God is not known through an understanding of God as that than which nothing greater can be thought Understanding that than which nothing greater can be thought implies only that it exists in the mind For a proof that God exists it must be conceded that that than which noth ing greater can be thought exists in reality But someone denying the existence of God will not concede this point 0 The only remaining way to prove God s existence is by showing that God is the cause of effects which are more evident to human reason than is the existence of od The Five Ways 0 Aquinas presented ve arguments from natural effects to the existence of a divine cause 0 These arguments are known as the ve ways of proving God s existence 0 The model for these arguments is found in the metaphysics of Aristotle 0 We will focus on two of the arguments and not cover the arguments from Motion Contingency Gradation The Argument from Causality o The basic idea of the argument from causality is that there must be a rst ef cient cause An ef cient cause is an agent that beings about a change in something else 1 Nothing can be prior to itself 2 An ef cient cause in nature is prior to its effect 3 So no ef cient cause in nature is the effect of itself 12 4 For any effect x in nature x has an ef cient cause 5 So for any effect x in nature there is an ef cient cause y that is distinct from x 34 6 If there is no ef cient cause that is not an effect then there is an in nite chain of ef cient causes 5 7 There is no in nite chain of ef cient causes 8 So there is an ef cient cause of an effect in nature that is not itself an effect 677 9 An ef cient cause that is not an effect is God 10 So God exists 89 The Argument from Governance 1 Natural bodies act so as to obtain the best results Aristotle 2 Acting so as to obtain the best results is acting on the basis of knowledge of the end Contra Aristotle 3 So natural bodies act on the basis of knowledge 12 4 Many natural bodies act on the basis of knowledge without having knowledge 3 observation 5 If a natural body acts on the basis of knowledge without having knowledge then it is directed by a being that has such knowledge 6 So many natural bodies are directed by a being that has knowledge of their ends 475 7 A being who directs natural bodies toward their ends is God 8 So many natural bodies are directed toward their ends by God 67 9 So God exists 8 Limitations of the Arguments o The arguments from natural effect to divine cause have an inherent limitation o The effects are nite while God is in nite 0 So the role of God as cause in each of the arguments does not yield perfect knowledge of God s essence 0 Together the ve arguments if successful only establish the existence of beings with the following features A mover that is not moved A cause that is not an effect Unable not to exist Possessing a maximum of goodness and all perfections Director of all natural things 0 Hume in the eighteenth century exposed a limitation of the arguments not ac knowledge by Aquinas A unitary God would explain all the effects but several different beings as causes could explain them The Argument from Evil 0 One of the chief problems with the notion of a perfectly good and powerful God is how evil can exist 0 Aquinas formulates the problem in this way 1 If God exists then goodness is in nite and there is no evil in the world 2 There is evil in the world 3 So God does not exist 12 0 One response given by followers of Plato is to deny the second premise Evil has no being but instead is a privation or lack of being 0 Aquinas allows that the second premise is true so he denies the truth of the rst premise o Aquinas claims that God allows evil in order to produce the good This strategy in philosophy is called compatibilism In this case the existence of God and of evil are claimed to be compatible with each other
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'