'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, April 22, 2010

on certainty 424


424. I say “I know p” either to assure people that I, too, know the truth p, or simply as an emphasis of |-p. One says, too, “I don’t believe I know it”. And one might also put it like this (for example) “That’s a tree. And that’s not just surmise.”

But what about this: “If I were to tell someone that that was a tree, that wouldn’t be just surmise.”  Isn’t this what Moore was trying to say?



yes – it could well be –

but the point is this –

stating that a proposition is not a surmise –

doesn’t make it any less a surmise

I think Moore wanted certainty –

and in the end came to the view –

that all he had to do was assert it –

and he managed to con a number of other idiots –

into sharing his delusion


© greg t. charlton. 2010.