School Of Athens, Rafael, Dallas discussed on Sean Carroll's Mindscape: Science, Society, Philosophy, Culture, Arts, and Ideas

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Personally very much like that and using terms like were changing a q. I n g opinion Which means motion typically in in classical chinese at this time but in most logic it refers to the categorical essence of something. So the chang of something is the quality that distinguishes that category from other similar categories. Got it okay. The it's the distinctive property that category. And if you don't understand that some passages in the drawings don't make censored sounds like he's a bad philosopher do when you understand is using these terms in a technical sense it makes more sense. Okay let me run by you. One while one more wild generalization that you can already said that you know the there. Is this kind of idea that humanity reached a stage. Where parasites like you and i could be supported by society and so they could have people whose job it was to think these big ideas and write them down and so forth so in some sense. There's a sort of right place right time aspect to these ample right like they could be. I like they can put a ideas out there and then there's fewer gigantic new philosophical schools coming later on because in some sense their reflections or modifications of the previous ones. So here's my crazy idea. You know if. I look at rafael's picture. The school of athens He has plato and he's pointing to the sky is pointing to the earth. And in some sense this is supposed to represent this big dichotomy between thinking and pure rationality plato and the forms and so forth and aristotle more empirical evidence based Experience of the world sort of that was the big division between the schools of thought whereas it seems to me that in the chinese thinking a again. Two hugely over generalize. We have this dichotomy between the confucianists thinking about society and people and our roles and the dallas thinking about nature and ourselves and where we put in. That's the distinction that was that was driven. There is it. Is it completely overreaching to these choices of what distinctions to highlight early on played a huge role in how people thought then for the next two thousand years. That's reasonable another way to put. It is trying versus. Not trying so confronted with the same paradox. They break different ways so the confusion. Say yes paradox but keep trying And it'll sort itself out you'll eventually become like confucius just trust us do this for a long time and you'll you'll become way eventually whereas the dow is much more worried about the problem of of effort contaminating the end state and they really kind of allergic to trying and i argue in my dissertation that this dichotomy between trying and not trying explains a lot of the divisions that happened later in chinese philosophy slash religion. You you constantly. Have you know what's interesting is that sometimes. The debate get solved by doctrinal fiat. So when the neo confusions come in. This is in the twelfth century. Ad they say mentioned his right..

Coming up next