Comments

  • Euclidean Geometry
    Consider a Koch snowflake.... finite area, infinite circumference.
  • Euthyphro
    Abelard seems not to have so thought; contradicted by Bernard at the Council of Sens 0f 1140. But this is a side issue of little interest.
  • Euthyphro
    This was what medieval people believed.frank

    Not all of them.

    There' another question here; since I can do evil, I can do something that god cannot do. So I am in at least one way more able than god.
  • Euthyphro
    I don’t think being “all good” is coherent for example,DingoJones

    An intuition with which I might sometimes agree; I'm not convinced that "...is good" works a predicate, at least not in the way "...is round" does. But there is much work to be done here, too.

    SO you would say the argument is valid, but relies on a false premise - that there is a god - and so is not cogent.
  • Euthyphro
    So the question is, is stuff good because it is loved by god, or is it loved by god because it is good?
  • Euthyphro
    I don’t really buy into any “omni” based arguments myself.DingoJones

    A reasonable approach. It's a classic case of concepts being employed beyond their remit.

    So, if we accept that there is a god who is all good, such a god can only will what is good; and if one ought do what is good, then (substituting) we ought do what god wills.

    A cogent argument?
  • Euthyphro
    Cool.

    The angle I wanted to explore is the application to monotheism. Hence the questions to Janus.
  • In praise of science.
    to truly understand human nature, one must have what I would call the “aristocratic experience”Todd Martin

    Laughable.


    To truly understand human nature, one must have what I would call the “disabled experience”. It's the bungled and botched who know where it's at. Chinless numbskulls be damned.
  • Euthyphro
    As do I; it remains to be seen if there is some interesting special pleading on behalf of the monotheists.

    Anticipating @Janus' argument, if god is omnibenevolent, then he cannot will anything that is not good; hence the good and the will of god coincide.
  • Euthyphro
    Much better. Thanks.
  • Euthyphro
    ...a teacher guy...DingoJones

    It's too ingrained for me to easily move past it. Just asking "What do you mean by..." in a discussion of Socratic method rings all sorts of alarm bells.

    But my answer to "What do you mean by piety", as for all such questions, will be that it doesn't have an essence that can be expounded in a paragraph, and that instead one must look to what is being done with it; hence my advice:
    Then watch. Or read the texts provided and question.Banno

    ...stands.
  • Euthyphro
    The equation of the good with what God loves is logically valid only on the assumption that God is omniscient (and omnibenevolent).Janus

    I'd like to see how this connection works. Can you fill in the gaps?
  • Euthyphro
    As Banno noted the dialogue ends in aporia. Most of them do.Fooloso4

    ...and yet in the process you and I have concluded that what is pious and what is beloved of god are distinct. Are we justified in this, if the end is inconclusive?

    Hence there may be room for @Janus' objection. Some work is required here.
  • Euthyphro
    Good - I had hoped you might bring this here.

    Seems to me we are looking at about 9a, and that Euthyphro adjusts his position to what is beloved by all the gods.

    That is, the point you make is explicit in the dialogue, and hence accounted in the conclusion.
  • Euthyphro
    ...Plato's mythology of the Good...Fooloso4

    ...I'm not familiar with this.
  • Euthyphro
    Im trying to understand what other people mean by those words...DingoJones

    Then watch. Or read the texts provided and question.
  • Euthyphro
    It's a rather neat, short example of Socratic method at work. It, or similar dialogues, ought be basic to the education of any with pretences to philosophical thinking. It was, I understand, long used as the first dialogue to which novices we exposed. A fine example of the sort of conceptual analysis that is the defying feature of philosophical enquiry.

    Could you elaborate what is meant by “piety”?DingoJones

    Indeed! But try it for yourself. That's what the discussion is - what is piety? What is Justice? What is good?
  • Euthyphro
    The argument has gone around in a circle.Fooloso4

    It was ever so. The conclusion is aporia; an impasse; a hurried withdrawal.

    Yes, this thread is a branch from a zombie. But we might take the point that what is right and what god wants are not the very same.
  • Belief in god is necessary for being good.
    I prefer to ignore them.Fooloso4

    It's a good policy. I don't know if history records the success of Euthyphro's case against his father. I wonder if it went for page after page, with folk taking it in turns to make the same points against him, without his even being able to recognise them?
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    But it also seem to be the case that some people are naturally more competitive than others.Janus

    Sure. You have heard the apocryphal Indian myth of one's soul being like two wolves? Which do we feed?

    Seems as there is much need to build the common wealth.
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    Scotty from Marketing makes decisions firstly to appease marginal voters and secondly to accomodate Liberal ideology. His capacity for spin, for appeasement and accomodation, are the attributes responsible for his position in the Government. Hence the dearth of leadership; it's not a requirement amongst Liberal power brokers; indeed recent history shows it to be detrimental, from their perspective.

    Notice how, when Boris and Biden got together to admonish him over climate change, it was portrayed as "Hey look! Our PM got to sit with the Big Boys!"
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    But you cannot force people to cultivate compassion.Janus

    Indeed. But one might adopt an ideology that discourages compassion. If one were to advocate behaviours that worked for one's own profit, for example, or that promoted competition rather than cooperation. One might develop a myth that greed necessarily leads to greater overall wealth, and maintain faith in such a myth in the face of the evidence; or a myth that the very laws of nature demand conflict. Over time such views can become unquestioned.

    Except for the occasional grandmotherly figure we might never question our myths.
  • Belief in god is necessary for being good.
    I'm glad you saw the joke. We need more straight thinkers willing to do the Right Thing.
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    That people don't have informed opinions and compassionate responses is the general problem, which is not a malfunction like blocked pipes but a natural characteristic of human life,Janus

    I'm bothered that one can set out "the natural characteristics of human life" on the one hand and yet accept there "should be a range of views, opinions and responses to questions of social order" on the other.

    Folk are malleable. As is set out in the article, once to was a commonplace that Kings had the right to obsequies obedience. It ain't so anymore.
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    I think the key point is that people must care enough to change what is unjust or cruel.Janus

    Spot on.

    I'll put undue emphasis on the plural - it's people, not individuals. Morality begins when one takes the Other into consideration. An ideology built on individuals - see the example Scotty from Marketing gave above - does not begin to address moral issues.

    That's the criticism I've addresses to @NOS4A2 a few times.
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley


    The penultimate paragraph:
    Granted, then, that the confusions are there, is abstract philosophi- cal speculation really a helpful remedy? Are the plumbers any use? Obviously this kind of speculation cannot work alone; all sorts of other human functions and faculties are needed too. But once you have got an articulate culture, the explicit, verbal statement of the problems does seem to be needed.
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    I reject the idea of a social contract, as I have said, and as you have acknowledged, so I have no idea why you are now saying that I insist on it.Janus

    Sure, but even in that rejection you continue to assume that individuals have primacy in social processes. For you the ideology of individualism remains unchallenged.

    The question I would put to critics of individualism is 'what would you put in its place?'. Individualism is the keystone of democracy, so if you reject it, it seems to me that you must be proposing some form of totalitarianism.Janus

    Indeed, that's the very question Midgley is asking - although you put it somewhat differently. We ('merica, 'Stralya, Britain) don't live in a democracy; it's an oligarchy. But the myth persists. Perhaps there is room between or around pretend democracy and totalitarianism; something different.

    And of course it is not the role of philosophers to "fix" stuff; but there is a place for conceptual analysis in the ongoing process.
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    The problem lies in the solution.Manuel

    Hence my puzzlement that Joshs thinks "We find something better and only then do we see the limits of the previous approach". Recognising the problem seems an essential first step.

    Midgley calls it a myth; Žižek talks of ideology. The important task is pointing to the contradictions in the assumed certainties.
  • Depression and Individualism

    You might enjoy the Midgley article cited in Philosophical Plumbing. It explores the link between overindulged individuality and the myth of the social contract.
  • Belief in god is necessary for being good.
    Bart has fallen back to ad homs. That marks the end of a cycle in the discussion.

    I recall such straight thinkers in my introductory logic classes. I don't wish to use the term as a pejorative, but its an almost autistic approach to argument: "a developmental disorder of variable severity that is characterised by difficulty in social interaction and communication and by restricted or repetitive patterns of thought and behaviour".

    Are you going around again?
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    Janus has a point in so far as no one asked anyone I know if they wanted to be part of any contract.Manuel

    Midgley says as much.
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    The ball valve allows the dishwasher to be disconnected.

    Murun should put on his trousers in public.
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    SO we have the strange bedfellows of @Janus, @Joshs and @NOS4A2 insisting on individuality and the social contract, even if, as in Nos's case, it is to reject it.

    When Scotty from Marketing set out his approach with the slogan "If you have a go, you get a go", he was espousing the social contract Midgley critiques; he disenfranchises those who cannot, or will not, as he puts it, 'have a go' - children, the disabled, indigenous communities, the poor. He fails to account for the place those who have a go have in the environment, as evident in his attitude towards climate change, species decline and environmental degradation. He places the ideology that is economics first.

    There's an evident failure to see the myth for what it is.
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    That stretchy silicone tape works though.frank

    Who invented bottle traps? Useless things. Thank goodness for silicon tape.
  • Belief in god is necessary for being good.
    Perhaps. For Happy Truth it's an issue of translation; but there are minimum standards for readability on this forum that Anand does not meet. Also, both have messianic tendencies.
  • Philosophical Plumbing — Mary Midgley
    So - how to proceed?Manuel

    The notion of a social contract was stillborn at birth.Janus

    Interesting juxtaposition.
  • Belief in god is necessary for being good.
    Neat job. A neat dissection of Bart's inept ratiocination.

    Good to have you involved again. There's a dearth of folk with some background in philosophy at present. Together with a few folk who have too much time and yet no capacity, crowding the site with nonsense.

    Hope that your foray into real life was productive.