'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.




Monday, June 29, 2009

on certainty 46


46. But then can’t it be described how we satisfy ourselves of the reliability of a calculation? O yes! Yet no rule emerges when we do so. – But the most important thing is: The rule is not needed. Nothing is lacking. We do calculate according to a rule, and that is enough.



the calculation is a game of sign substitution –

where  x = y –

satisfying yourself of the reliability of a calculation –

is nothing more than accepting its terms –

and this you have to do –

if you are to play the game

if you don’t accept its terms –

you don’t play the game

and yes – you can question the game –

any aspect of it –

x = y – is a proposal for substitution –

it is not a rule –

and there is no rule underlying it –

no authority behind it –

what does underlie it is a practise –

a practise that is open to question –

open doubt


© greg t. charlton. 2009.