Very interesting reading, but I have a doubt about the evaluation of conspiracy theories.
I think it’s correct and useful to investigate them (I learned many interesting things about Apollo missions from debunking material of the moon hoax). But it’s also dangerous: bullshits are everywhere and evaluating even only a fraction of them requires time and intellectual energy. And we risk legitimate those bullshits in the public space.
Very interesting. I would like to add another eclectic argument:
Ultimately “tranquility of mind” and “truth and virtue” don’t contradict each other once you accept (as you seem to do) that there is no absolute truth. Thus you can suspend judgement about any “ultimate truth” (with tranquility) and still look for a better and pragmatic (truthful and virtuous) approximation or treatment of the matter in question.
Paul, the Stoic position, which I agree with, is that truth and virtue are the goals, and tranquillity comes as a byproduct. An Epicurean, though, would say that tranquillity is the goal and virtue is instrumental to it. Hard to reconcile these two.
Also, I do think truth exists. I just don't think we can know for sure when we found it.
Another excellent post. The more I learn about Cicero the more I like him. Any chance you’ll make your series of posts from Medium on the Political Philosophy of Cicero available on your Substack?
Doug, you are having my same reaction to reading more about Cicero! I don't plan on making the Medium posts available on Substack because I conceived of this newsletter as a new thread to develop my thoughts. However, next year I'll be on sabbatical to write a book. Guess who will be its protagonist?...
I like your approach to doubt here. Working out how to strike a balance between useful doubt and sheer desperation at the impossibility of absolutely certain knowledge is a tricky needle to thread. Your approach seems a sensible way forward.
I think it's a shame that Richard Feynman was always so scathing of philosophy because in practice he seemed to have such a sensible philosophical approach (at least to scientific questions). He maintained that the best answer he could give to a great many questions was "I don't know", but he certainly didn't mean that we should live in a state of unknowingness. We do know things, with varying levels of confidence (or probability, depending on how you think probability works for facts of reality!).
Massimo, what do you think of Hegel's dialectics?
(To be clear, I'm not an academic philosopher, just an interested engineer.)
I was thinking the same thing, having just read "The Theory that would not Die" by Sharon Bertsch McGrayne. Much sounds very similar. Especially in the notion of Bayesian Priors.
Very interesting reading, but I have a doubt about the evaluation of conspiracy theories.
I think it’s correct and useful to investigate them (I learned many interesting things about Apollo missions from debunking material of the moon hoax). But it’s also dangerous: bullshits are everywhere and evaluating even only a fraction of them requires time and intellectual energy. And we risk legitimate those bullshits in the public space.
Yes, it's a conundrum. Intellectual honesty demands we investigate. Prudence suggests we simply ignore. Perhaps some kind of creative compromise...
Very interesting. I would like to add another eclectic argument:
Ultimately “tranquility of mind” and “truth and virtue” don’t contradict each other once you accept (as you seem to do) that there is no absolute truth. Thus you can suspend judgement about any “ultimate truth” (with tranquility) and still look for a better and pragmatic (truthful and virtuous) approximation or treatment of the matter in question.
Paul, the Stoic position, which I agree with, is that truth and virtue are the goals, and tranquillity comes as a byproduct. An Epicurean, though, would say that tranquillity is the goal and virtue is instrumental to it. Hard to reconcile these two.
Also, I do think truth exists. I just don't think we can know for sure when we found it.
That’s even better news. I’ll be in line on its release day to get my copy!
Another excellent post. The more I learn about Cicero the more I like him. Any chance you’ll make your series of posts from Medium on the Political Philosophy of Cicero available on your Substack?
Doug, you are having my same reaction to reading more about Cicero! I don't plan on making the Medium posts available on Substack because I conceived of this newsletter as a new thread to develop my thoughts. However, next year I'll be on sabbatical to write a book. Guess who will be its protagonist?...
I like your approach to doubt here. Working out how to strike a balance between useful doubt and sheer desperation at the impossibility of absolutely certain knowledge is a tricky needle to thread. Your approach seems a sensible way forward.
I think it's a shame that Richard Feynman was always so scathing of philosophy because in practice he seemed to have such a sensible philosophical approach (at least to scientific questions). He maintained that the best answer he could give to a great many questions was "I don't know", but he certainly didn't mean that we should live in a state of unknowingness. We do know things, with varying levels of confidence (or probability, depending on how you think probability works for facts of reality!).
Massimo, what do you think of Hegel's dialectics?
(To be clear, I'm not an academic philosopher, just an interested engineer.)
Yes, it's really too bad about Feynman. I admire the scientist and the philosopher in him, but he had an allergic reaction to the P-word.
I don't think much about Hegel, sorry!
It seems to me that Cicero was a precursor of bayesian epistemology.
I was thinking the same thing, having just read "The Theory that would not Die" by Sharon Bertsch McGrayne. Much sounds very similar. Especially in the notion of Bayesian Priors.
Carles,
he anticipated the idea. As did Hume many centuries later. Of course, not the quantitative aspect.
Hopefully I can adopt it. One is always striving to be a better person. I find your articles very useful.
Naresh, thanks for your kind words. I'll strive to keep putting out interesting and useful stuff.