'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.




Tuesday, April 20, 2010

on certainty 420

420. Even a proposition like this one, that I am now living in England, has these two sides: it is not a mistake – but on the other hand, what do I know of England? Can’t my judgment go all to pieces?

Would it not be possible that people came into my room and all declared the opposite? – even gave me ‘proofs’ of it, so that I suddenly stood there like a madman alone among people who all were normal, or a normal person alone among madmen? Might I not then suffer doubts about what at present seems at the furthest from remove from doubt?



the ground of any judgment – is uncertainty

and whether a judgment does or does not ‘go all to pieces’ –

will depend on circumstances

in the event of the madman scenario –

if you understand that all judgments are uncertain –

then you will see that you are all in the same boat

regardless of numbers –

and regardless of so called ‘proofs’

in the event of conflict –

what wins the day will be what people assent to

and of course –

you can always go it alone


© greg t. charlton. 2010.