'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 23, 2010

on certainty 476


6.4.

476. Children do not learn that books exist, that armchairs exist, etc. etc. – they learn to fetch the books, sit in armchairs, etc. etc

Later, questions about the existence of things do of course arise. “Is there such a thing as a unicorn?” and so on. But such a question is possible only because as a rule no corresponding question presents itself. For how does one know how to set about satisfying oneself of the existence of unicorns? How did one learn the method of determining whether something exists or not?



yes children act – and they learn to act in terms of descriptions given them

‘is there such a thing as a unicorn?’ –
                                                                                                                                 
is a question of the application of a description –

i.e. – do I use the term ‘unicorn’ – in the same way as I would use the term ‘book’ or ‘armchair’?

one does not set about satisfying oneself of the existence of unicorns – one learns – where the term ‘unicorns’ has function and where it does not –

‘how does one learn the method of determining whether something exists or not?’

the question is – ‘does this description have function – and if so in what context?’

to exist is to be described – to be made known

before description – all we have is ‘that’ which is not described – that which has not been made known

‘that’ is the unknown –

and any account of ‘that’ – any description of ‘that’ –

is open to question – open to doubt –

is uncertain


© greg t. charlton. 2010.

 




© greg t. charlton. 2010.