From wiki, 'Buridan's ass' quoting from Spinoza:
"[I]t may be objected, if man does not act from free will, what will happen if the incentives to action are equally balanced, as in the case of Buridan's ass? [In reply,] I am quite ready to admit, that a man placed in the equilibrium described (namely, as perceiving nothing but hunger and thirst, a certain food and a certain drink, each equally distant from him) would die of hunger and thirst. If I am asked, whether such an one should not rather be considered an ass than a man; I answer, that I do not know, neither do I know how a man should be considered, who hangs himself, or how we should consider children, fools, madmen, &c."
Spinoza Speranza
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
BF Skinner of 1670 or so. Anyway Barry himself doesn't seem to approve of the hypothetical. Only an ass (or madman) would starve, says Spin; at some point he would move towards one form of "reinforcement" ie food or drink.
ReplyDeleteSpinoza sides with strict determinists (and Bricmont quotes BS at times) does he not-- yet he also retained most of the scholastic terms, not to say...the Old Testament (tho' revised...by Spinoza!). . So earthquakes, world wars, plagues--all part of JHVH's plan, which is to say nature's plan
That said, Spinoza was a genius of sorts--but many lefty types who view him as a sort of guru don't ...read between the lines (like of his odd classic "Ethics"). His mechanism was anti-humanist in a sense. (One reason some scientists like Bricmont approve, probably). Yet...Spinoza insisted he wasn't an atheist. He became a type of Aristotelian--arguably-- tho with modifications (ie no final causes)--and may have joined the...papists! He's buried in the christian graveyard around the Hague. Or something.
ReplyDeleteYes. Genius! I will reserach on 'free-wheeling' because this is an idiom that Grice mentions as important in our analysis of 'free': his other two idioms are "alcohol-free" (I prefer 'sugar-free') and 'free for lunch'.
ReplyDelete"Are you free for lunch?"
Surely the question is stupid.
"This is alcohol-free".
Surely the statement is stupid.
I'm less sure about idiotic uses of 'free-wheeling'.
Seeing, as Grice saw, that people overuse 'free', it's no wonder Kant felt he had to write a book about it ("Critique of practical reason"). The fact that he didn't include nice illustrations in it, or stuff, meant it wasn't the bestseller it was meant to be. Or stuff.
I don't quite see how "free-wheeling" relates to my points on Spinoza. And was Grice merely taking issue with diction? I agree it's awkward, but...been in use for some time (sometimes you will see "no alcohol, or alcohol-less). That doesn't pertain to the freewill/determinism issue; really most analyticals avoided the issue (including the ord-lang types)--tho they generally tended to side towards strict determinism (as with Quine...who pretty much says Mind is an illusion).
ReplyDelete