'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.




Sunday, May 09, 2010

on certainty 452


452. It would not be reasonable to doubt if that was a real tree or only…

My finding it beyond doubt is not what counts. If a doubt would be unreasonable, that cannot be seen from what I hold. There would therefore have to be a rule that declares doubt to be unreasonable. But there isn’t such a rule, either.



the proposition – any proposition – is a proposal –

open to question – open to doubt – uncertain

‘finding beyond doubt’ –

is to find against propositional logic –

it is to find for prejudice – for ignorance –

for stupidity

any so called ‘rule’ – like any proposition –

is open to question – open to doubt –

is uncertain

and any rule that declared doubt to be ‘unreasonable’ –

or for that matter ‘reasonable’ –

at best is a piece of rhetoric –

and like all rhetoric – whether effective or not –

hot air


© greg t. charlton. 2010.