'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, March 18, 2010

on certainty 353


353. But suppose he said “I want to make a logical observation”? – If a forester goes into a wood with his men and says “This tree has got to be cut down, and this one and this one” – what if he then observes “I know that that’s a tree? – But might not I say of the forester “He knows that that’s a tree – he doesn’t examine it, or order his men to examine it”?



if he says ‘I know that’s a tree’ –

he corrupts a straightforward assertion – ‘that’s a tree’ –

with irrelevant rhetoric

and if you say –

‘he knows that that’s a tree’ –

you do the same

regardless of what is examined or not –

with or without rhetoric –

any proposition – any proposal –

is open to question –

open to doubt –

is uncertain


© greg t. charlton. 2010.