Author: Bill Vallicella
Against Terminological Mischief: ‘Negative Atheism’ and ‘Negative Nominalism’
This from the seemingly reputable site, Investigating Atheism:
More recently, atheists have argued that atheism only denotes a lack of theistic belief, rather than the active denial or claims of certainty it is often associated with.
I'm having a hard time seeing what point there could be in arguing that "atheism only denotes a lack of theistic belief." Note first that atheism cannot be identified with the lack of theistic belief, i.e., the mere absence of the belief that God exists, for that would imply that cabbages and tire irons are atheists. Note second that it won't do to say that atheism is the lack of theistic belief in persons, for there are persons incapable of forming beliefs. Charitably interpreted, then, the idea must be that atheism is the lack of theistic belief in persons capable of forming and maintaining beliefs.
Continue reading “Against Terminological Mischief: ‘Negative Atheism’ and ‘Negative Nominalism’”
After Auschwitz: Adorno’s Leftist Sensibility Illustrated from Minima Moralia
A correspondent from the Netherlands sends this passage from Theodor W. Adorno's Minima Moralia: Reflexionen aus dem beschädigten Leben. It is from the short essay, "Herr Doktor, das ist schön von Euch."
Noch der Baum, der blüht, lügt in dem Augenblick, in welchem man sein Blühen ohne den Schatten des Entsetzens wahrnimmt; noch das unschuldige Wie schön wird zur Ausrede für die Schmach des Daseins, das anders ist, und es ist keine Schönheit und kein Trost mehr außer in dem Blick, der aufs Grauen geht, ihm standhält und im ungemilderten Bewußtsein der Negativität die Möglichkeit des Besseren festhält.
Here is the essay in toto in Dennis Redmond's translation. The italicized portion is the translation of the above German. I have interrupted the flow of the text with some comments of my own. I want to use this text to convey to you something of the mentality and sensibility of an extremely erudite and sophisticated leftist and of leftists in general. It helps to bear in mind that Minima Moralia was published in 1951.
Continue reading “After Auschwitz: Adorno’s Leftist Sensibility Illustrated from Minima Moralia“
The Gypsy Scholar on Scruton on Islam and the West
In Scruton-izing the West, Horace Jeffery Hodges at his fine site Gypsy Scholar summarizes Roger Scruton's take on the differences between us and them. Scruton finds seven key differences, the seventh of which, surprisingly, is alcohol. Jeff provides substantial excerpts and of course links to Scruton's article. Well worth your time. Jeff will be happy to accept your comments.
What is Wrong and What is Right with Wittgenstein’s Philosophy of Religion
One source of the appeal of ordinary language philosophy (OLP) is that it reinstates much of what was ruled out as cognitively meaningless by logical positivism (LP) but without rehabilitating the commitments of old-time metaphysics. In particular, OLP allows the reinstating of religious language. This post explains, with blogic brevity, how this works and what is wrong and what right with the resulting philosophy of religion. Since OLP can be understood only against the backdrop of LP, I begin with a brief review of LP.
Continue reading “What is Wrong and What is Right with Wittgenstein’s Philosophy of Religion”
Ever Wonder Why You Are Fat?
Where dreams become heart attacks. The Taco Town Taco looks quite tempting. The next time you are out with your philosopher cronies, you should consider starting your symposium with an appetizer. May I recommend several meta-pizzas? An excellent choice for main course would be the Sandwich of Knowledge here depicted.
TypePad ComBox Quirk
I sometimes have trouble getting the TypePad ComBox to accept my comments. Others have had this problem. I get the error message: "Sorry, this data cannot be accepted.' By fiddling around, I have discovered that doing one or more of the following will trigger the system to accept data. (1) Make a minor alteration in the text. (2) Resubmit your name and e-mail address. (3) Copy your comment, open the blog in a new window and input the data via the new window. It seems that problems arise if you leave the ComBox open too long in a given window or take too long composing your comment.
What I have yet to figure out is how to make full HTML functionality available in the ComBox.
The Definition of ‘Atheist’ and the Burden of Proof
Some define atheism in terms of the absence of the belief that God exists. This won't do, obviously, since then we would have to count cabbages and sparkplugs as atheists given the absence in these humble entities of the belief that God exists. But the following could be proffered with some show of plausibility: An atheist is a person whose psychological makeup is such as to permit his standing in the propositional atttude of belief toward the proposition that God exists, but who as a matter of fact does not stand in this relation, nor is disposed to stand in this relation were he to be queried about the existence of God. Note that it does not suffice to say that an atheist is a person in whom the belief that God exists is lacking for then the neonatal and the senile would count as atheists, which is surely a bit of a stretch.
Continue reading “The Definition of ‘Atheist’ and the Burden of Proof”
Adorno on Wittgenstein’s Indescribable Vulgarity
Theodor W. Adorno, Philosophische Terminologie I (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1973). pp. 55-56:
Continue reading “Adorno on Wittgenstein’s Indescribable Vulgarity”
In Praise of Blogosophy
Philosophy is primarily an activity, not a body of doctrine. If you were to think of it as a body of doctrine, then you would have to say there is no philosophy, but only philosophies. For there is no one universally recognized body of doctrine called philosophy. The truth of course is one not many. And that is what the philosopher aims at: the one ultimate truth about the ultimate matters, including the ultimate truth about how we ought to live. But aiming at a target and hitting it are two different things. The target is one, but our many arrows have fallen short and in different places. And if you think that your favorite philosopher has hit the target of truth, why can't you convince the rest of us of that?
Religion and the Inculcation of Morality
Many of us internalized the ethical norms that guide our lives via our childhood religious training. We were taught the Ten Commandments, for example. We were not just taught about them, we were taught them. We learned them by heart, and we took them to heart. This early training, far from being the child abuse that A. C. Grayling and other militant atheists think it is, had a very positive effect on us in forming our consciences and making of us the basically decent human beings we are. I am not saying that moral formation is possible only within a religion; I am saying that some religions do an excellent job of transmitting and inculcating life-guiding and life-enhancing ethical standards. (By the way, I use 'ethical' and 'moral' interchangeably, as I explain here.)
The Politicization of the American Philosophical Association
Several people have asked me my opinion on the recent petition to the American Philosophical Association regarding alleged discrimination by certain colleges and universities against homosexuals. At the moment I have nothing to say about either the petition or the counterpetition. I want to point out that the politicization of the A. P. A. is nothing new and, more importantly, that it is inconsistent with the charter of the A. P. A as a professional organization that it take groups stands on debatable social and political questions. My reasons are given in the letter to the A. P. A. reproduced below.
Neven Sesardic e-mailed a while back:
I wonder whether there has ever been any reaction to your wonderful letter to the APA about their stand on the war in Iraq. I let my subscription lapse after that.
I did receive a very nice supportive letter from Panayot Butchvarov, although it may have been in reference to an earlier letter in which I protested the APA's taking of a group stand against capital punishment. Having lived under Communism, Butchvarov is familiar with the perils of groupthink.
I am glad to hear that Sesardic let his membership lapse. So did I. And I encourage other conservatives and libertarians to ask themselves whether it is really in their best interest to fund Left-leaning organizations. But even liberals should be able to appreciate that professional organizations ought not take group stands on eminently debatable social and political questions. Here is the Iraq letter, published in the Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, vol. 77, no. 2 (Nov., 2003), p. 85.
Dear Editor:
The APA Pacific Division has proposed a resolution to "express our serious doubts about the morality, legality and prudence of a war against Iraq led by the United States." If individual members have doubts, it is their right to express them in their capacity as private citizens. But a collective expression by the APA as a whole, or in any of its Divisions, is clearly inappropriate. The reason should be obvious. The purpose of the APA is "exclusively educational, literary and scientific . . . " as per its constitution. It is therefore in keeping with its charter that the APA provide a framework in which serious discussion of questions concerning pacifism, just war doctrine, etc., can take place. But for the APA to endorse pacifism, or just war theory, or a version of just war theory that rules out preemptive strikes, or to express doubts about the moral justification of a particular war, is clearly in violation of its mandate. This would be as wrong, and indeed as absurd, as if the APA were to adopt an official stance on the mind-body problem, or on any other philosophical problem. If the APA is not prepared to take sides in the debate between, say, John Searle and Daniel Dennett, then it ought not take sides in the debate in foreign policy between, say, William J. Bennett and Noam Chomsky.
But the effort and expense spent on this hopelessly belated resolution are not entirely wasted. The arguments given in favor of the resolution, fallacious as they are, provide excellent fodder for logical analysis, and so may be of some use to teachers of logic. The latter can say to their students: Here is what happens when otherwise intelligent people allow ideological bias to cloud their thinking.
Saturday Night at the Oldies: Memorable Instrumentals from the ’60s.
Jorma Kaukonen's Embryonic Journey from The Jefferson Airplane's Surrealistic Pillow LP, 1967.
Bent Fabric, Alley Cat, 1962.
The Village Stompers, Washington Square, 1963.
Kenny Ball, Midnight in Moscow, 1962.
David Rose, The Stripper, 1962.
Acker Bilk, Stranger on the Shore, 1962.
Dick Dale and the Deltones, Misirlou, 1963. If surf music had a father, Dick Dale was the man.
The Chantays, Pipeline, 1963. A nice college boy effort, but the definitive version is the Dick Dale and Stevie Ray Vaughan cover.
Floyd Cramer, Last Date, 1960.
Michael Bloomfield, Albert's Shuffle, 1968. Definitive proof that a white boy can play the blues.
The Lottery Player
The lottery player, unable to think clearly about money, both overvalues and undervalues it.
He overvalues it inasmuch as he thinks that a big win would be a wonderful thing even though it would probably not be, and won't occur in any case for the vast majority of players. There are plenty of examples, some reported here, of people who have been destroyed by a sudden huge windfall. For instance,
The Two-Fold Sense of ‘The Actual World’
A correspondent poses the following difficulty:
. . . compare two possible worlds W1 and W2. What makes them different worlds? Their constituent substances and events – that’s how we identify a world. Let’s say that W1 and W2 are distinct possible worlds, and add that A, the actual world, is in fact W1. [. . .] And then we seem to have a problem: It turns out that W1 = A, but W1 ≠ W2. But if we say that A could have been W2, then it seems that W1 could have been W2 – but that’s impossible, given the necessity of identity. What to do, what to do . . . .
Think about how you would respond to this before proceeding.