'For the person or persons that hold dominion, can no more combine with the keeping up of majesty the running with harlots drunk or naked about the streets, or the performances of a stage player, or the open violation or contempt of laws passed by themselves than they can combine existence with non-existence'.

- Benedict de Spinoza. Political Treatise. 1677.




Wednesday, June 10, 2009

on certainty 24


24. The idealist’s question would be something like: “What right have I not to doubt the existence of my hands?” (And to that the answer can’t be: I know that they exist.) But someone who asks such a question is overlooking the fact that a doubt about existence only works in a language game. Hence, that we should first have to ask: what would such a doubt be like?, and I don’t understand this straight off.



the idealist doesn’t doubt the existence of his hands –

he doubts the materialist description of his hands

his hands as such – in the absence of any description –

are unknown


© greg t. charlton. 2009.