總網頁瀏覽量

2013年4月27日 星期六

Saturday Fun (週末歡樂)

Philosophers are a rare kind of animals. They fancy themselves rational and strive to ensure that every thought, every concept and every proposition is concise, precise and TRUE(WHATEVER THAT FIVE LETTER WORD MAY MEAN).  Some even delude themselves that they have succeeded: Plato, Descartes, Kant, Hegel etc. Do philosophers who think that they think clearly really "express" themselves so "clearly" that they succeed ONLY in baffling  instead of clearing the minds of the "layman"  of what the philosophers think of as "illusions" or "errors"?  What do I mean?


1. To a layman, a hooker is one who can be hired to engage in sexual intercourse. To a philosopher, a hooker is one who thinks that "if A, then B" is logically equivalent (in some sense) to "either not-A, or B"; someone who can be hired to tutor undergraduates, and costs much less.

2. To a layman, "utilitarian" means almost precisely cubical and made of concrete, probably a multi-storey car park but to a philosopher, it means one who believes that the morally right action is the one with the best consequences, so far as the distribution of happiness is concerned; a creature generally believed to be endowed with the propensity to ignore their own drowning children in order to push buttons which will cause mild sexual gratification in a warehouse full of rabbits.

3. To a lay man, "personal identity" means the subject of self-help books and those modern Broadway songs which involve the use of a spotlight but to a philosopher, it means that by virtue of which I am the same person I was yesterday.

4. A lay soldier would way, "Logic dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, Captain" but a philosopher would say that it involves upside-down "A's "and reversed "E's".

5. To a lay man, "existential" means a quantifier, an angst-ridden statistician but to a philosopher, it means  a "reversed E" (see above)

6. To a lay man, "a posteriori " means things you think of when you're sitting down but to a philosopher it means knowledge which is the result of and is based upon experience of some kind.

7. To a lay man, "a priori" means something you've thought of to head your "things to do" list but to a philosopher, it means things you think of when you're sitting down, in an armchair, usually with a snifter of brandy in one hand.

8. To a lay man, "Platonic" means the sort of love which is all very well in its way but to a philosopher, it means a philosophical position which posits abstract objects almost palpable enough to trip over.

9 To a lay man, " Quine" means an alternative spelling of the Old Scottish word "quean", a synonym for "strumpet" which one might just get away with using in a game of Scrabble; indeed, which one often has to resort to using if all of the U's are already on the board but to philosopher, it means a contemporary philosopher of formidable reputation who I've never actually met, and whose beard I am told does not exist, but who I imagine has quite an impressive snort.

10. To a lay man, "Locke" means " thatte whyche prevents rogues and arrant knaves from burgling Ye Olde English Tea Shoppe" but to a philosopher, it means  "a dead philosopher of politics, language and mind."
  
11. To a lay man, "t" means a letter of the alphabet but to a philosopher it means a moment in time.
  
 12. To a lay man, "modal" is something to do with different tonal centres and flattened leading notes, as in "Scarborough Fair" but to a philosopher it means that the phrase "possible worlds" is going to be mentioned any second now.
   
13. To a lay man, "possible world" means  "a phrase which I seem to recall was used as a lyric in a recent animated movie from the Walt Disney studios" but to a philosopher, it means  either the biggest spatio-temporally connected thing of which we are all part, in which case there is only one; or some sort of weird abstraction, in which case there are uncountably many; but for a different view see "Lewis".

14. To a lay man , "Lewis" means  the author of books about Narnia but to a philosopher it means  a contemporary philosopher with a formidable reputation and a truly colossal beard.

15. To a lay man, "realist" means hard-headed but to a philosopher, it means someone who believes in the existence of trees; usually hard-headed, but if you mean "realist about everything", then you're decidedly soft-headed.

16. To a lay man, "idealist" means tree-hugging but to a philosopher, it means one who doesn't actually disbelieve in trees, but who thinks that they can't be bumped into, take up no space, and are in constant danger of winking out of existence if they are not properly attended to.

17. To a lay man, "pragmatist" means as hard-headed as they come but to a philosopher, it means someone whose belief in the existence of trees depends on their belief in the disposition of scientifically-minded angels to believe in trees.

18. To a lay man, "metaphysics" means  somewhere between "crystal healing" and "tree hugging" in the Dewey decimal system  but the philosopher would say, "No! How many times do I have to tell you? Nothing whatever to do with this New Age stuff! Now move my book away from the stand containing Shirley MacLaine, or I shall be very upset."

Is it any wonder that Socrates was forced to take hemlock by his fellow citizens for corrupting the minds of the youths of Athens? Philosophy does have a strange way of getting into the way of our having a wonderful weekend !

6 則留言:

  1. 又到星期六笑話
    [版主回覆04/27/2013 12:30:59]Philosophic or non-philosophic laughter, I wonder !

    回覆刪除
  2. 明日又開工啦..
    [版主回覆04/29/2013 10:30:47]Unfortunately,yes. Or is it fortunately???

    回覆刪除
  3. For me, it is better to be a layman.
    [版主回覆04/29/2013 10:31:37]Perhaps you're wiser than a "philosopher" ?

    回覆刪除
  4. I admit that I never understand what philosophers say.
    [版主回覆04/29/2013 23:07:40]You're not alone! Neither do some of them !

    回覆刪除
  5. Read again after 36hours, I conclude that I am a layman as a layman should be. What a big revelation! Thank you. Have a great week from a layman's perspective.
    [版主回覆04/29/2013 23:12:38]I'm sure your time would have been much more profitably spent ! But thanks for giving it as much thought to it as if it really merits the same. Have another productive week !

    回覆刪除
  6. For every philosopher, there exists an equal and opposite philosopher. And they're both wrong.
    [版主回覆04/30/2013 11:32:50]If "every philosopher" in the first sentence includes the writer of that sentence, THEN IF the second sentence is right, then it must be wrong. IF so, then the two propositions are self-refuting.

    回覆刪除