We must not look for a mathematics of conduct.
People’s actual opinions, about their own preconceptions as about anything else, count as evidence for little but the chatter of their minds.
Is Aristotle claiming t to proclaim that truth is bounded by opinion
One cannot, in modern English, sensibly say that a proposition which is believed by a majority of people, or by the most notable of the experts, is thereby shown to be probable. It may be believed because it is, in fact, probable, but it is not probable just because it is believed. And it would be very misleading to speak of Aristotle’s philosophy as built on probabilities.
Even if they are wrong...they are right
But Aristotle does not make the clean separation between evidence and opinion on which this argument presumes. The fact that a proposition is believed by the majority or by experts is not for Aristotle just a sign that, if we asked them, they could cite evidence for the proposition. Their belief, as he treats it, is already some evidence in favour of what they believe; even if the opinion is not correct, it is likely to contain an element of truth which the dialectic can sift out and formulate clearly.
Hear this you liberals astride Mount Moral
It is all-important to remember that practical or moral rules are only general and always admit of exceptions, and that they arise not from the mere complexity of the facts, but from the liability of the facts to a certain unpredictable variation.
At their very best, practical rules state probabilities, not certainties; a relative constancy of connection is all that exists, but it is enough to serve as a guide in life. Aristotle here holds the balance between a misleading hope of reducing the subject-matter of conduct to a few simple rigorous abstract principles, with conclusions necessarily issuing from them, a
So in moral questions there is no absolute uniformities
There are alwas inscrutable forces acting without predictable regularity.
So in moral questions there is no absolute uniformities, or to deduce details from principles.
Just carry out the moral act do not question it
Moral experience—the actual possession and exercise of good character—is necessary truly to understand moral principles and profitably to apply them. The mere intellectual apprehension of them is not possible, or if possible, profitless.
=
People’s actual opinions, about their own preconceptions as about anything else, count as evidence for little but the chatter of their minds.
Is Aristotle claiming t to proclaim that truth is bounded by opinion
One cannot, in modern English, sensibly say that a proposition which is believed by a majority of people, or by the most notable of the experts, is thereby shown to be probable. It may be believed because it is, in fact, probable, but it is not probable just because it is believed. And it would be very misleading to speak of Aristotle’s philosophy as built on probabilities.
Even if they are wrong...they are right
But Aristotle does not make the clean separation between evidence and opinion on which this argument presumes. The fact that a proposition is believed by the majority or by experts is not for Aristotle just a sign that, if we asked them, they could cite evidence for the proposition. Their belief, as he treats it, is already some evidence in favour of what they believe; even if the opinion is not correct, it is likely to contain an element of truth which the dialectic can sift out and formulate clearly.
Hear this you liberals astride Mount Moral
It is all-important to remember that practical or moral rules are only general and always admit of exceptions, and that they arise not from the mere complexity of the facts, but from the liability of the facts to a certain unpredictable variation.
At their very best, practical rules state probabilities, not certainties; a relative constancy of connection is all that exists, but it is enough to serve as a guide in life. Aristotle here holds the balance between a misleading hope of reducing the subject-matter of conduct to a few simple rigorous abstract principles, with conclusions necessarily issuing from them, a
So in moral questions there is no absolute uniformities
There are alwas inscrutable forces acting without predictable regularity.
So in moral questions there is no absolute uniformities, or to deduce details from principles.
Just carry out the moral act do not question it
Moral experience—the actual possession and exercise of good character—is necessary truly to understand moral principles and profitably to apply them. The mere intellectual apprehension of them is not possible, or if possible, profitless.
=
No comments:
Post a Comment