'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.




Thursday, December 03, 2009

on certainty 181

181. Suppose Moore had said “I swear…” instead of “I know…”
                                                                                                                                   


‘I swear…’ would in some ways have more intellectual integrity

we could ask – ‘you swear on what?

meaning what is the authority you are appealing to?

perhaps that is why Moore didn’t say ‘I swear…’ –

he would have to reveal what it is that he thinks is the ground of his authority

and then of course the matter would be open to dispute –

where’s the authority?

perhaps he would end up reverting to ‘I know’ –

and saying –

‘well I know – because I know’

this would be a good outcome

because it would have made clear –

that the ‘authority’ that Moore appeals to –

doesn’t exist

that his ‘authority’ –

is no more than his assertion 


© greg t. charlton. 2009.