Hope: Archetypes of wisdom pdf download
| Archetypes of wisdom pdf download | 510 |
| Archetypes of wisdom pdf download | 730 |
| Archetypes of wisdom pdf download | 621 |
| Archetypes of wisdom pdf download | 577 |
Archetypes of Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy
www.wadsworth.com www.wadsworth.com is the World Wide Web site for Thomson Wadsworth and is your direct source to dozen...
Author: Douglas J. Soccio
375 downloads 1785 Views 10MB Size Report
This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form
www.wadsworth.com www.wadsworth.com is the World Wide Web site for Thomson Wadsworth and is your direct source to dozens of online resources. At www.wadsworth.com you can find out about supplements, demonstration software, and student resources. You can also send e-mail to many of our authors and preview new publications and exciting new technologies. www.wadsworth.com Changing the way the world learns®
This page intentionally left blank
A N I NTRODUCTION
TO
P HILOSOPHY
Sixth Edition
Douglas J. Soccio
Australia • Brazil • Canada • Mexico • Singapore • Spain United Kingdom • United States
ARCHETYPES OF WISDOM
Publisher: Holly J. Allen Philosophy Editor: Steve Wainwright Assistant Editors: Lee McCracken, Barbara Hillaker Editorial Assistant: Gina Kessler Technology Project Manager: Julie Aguilar Marketing Manager: Worth Hawes Marketing Assistant: Alexandra Tran Marketing Communications Manager: Stacey Purviance Creative Director: Rob Hugel Executive Art Director: Maria Epes Print Buyer: Rebecca Cross
Permissions Editors: Joohee Lee, Sarah Harkrader Production Service: Robin C. Hood Text Designer: Marsha Cohen Photo Researcher: Billie Porter Copy Editor: Joan Pendleton Illustrator: Dick Cole Cover Designer: Yvo Riezebos Design/Hatty Lee Cover Image: Charles O’Rear / CORBIS Compositor: Interactive Composition Corporation Cover and Text Printer: R. R. Donnelley, Willard
COPYRIGHT © 2007 Thomson Wadsworth, a part of The Thomson Corporation. Thomson, the Star logo, and Wadsworth are trademarks used herein under license.
ExamView® and ExamView Pro® are registered trademarks of FSCreations, Inc. Windows is a registered trademark of the Microsoft Corporation used herein under license. Macintosh and Power Macintosh are registered trademarks of Apple Computer, Inc. Used herein under license.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright hereon may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means— graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, web distribution, information storage and retrieval systems, or in any other manner—without the written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
09
08
07
06
COPYRIGHT © 2007 Thomson Learning, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Thomson Higher Education 10 Davis Drive Belmont, CA 94002-3098 USA Library of Congress Control Number: 2005938310
For more information about our products, contact us at: Thomson Learning Academic Resource Center 1-800-423-0563 For permission to use material from this text or product, submit a request online at http://www.thomsonrights.com. Any additional questions about permissions can be submitted by e-mail to [email protected]
ISBN 0495130036 Paper Edition: ISBN 0495007072
For Margaret, Who has shown me that greatness of soul is more than a philosopher’s fantasy. Thank you does not begin to cover it.
This page intentionally left blank
CONTENTS
Preface xv CHAPTER CHAPTER
1
Philosophy and the Search for Wisdom / 1
2
The Asian Sages: Lao-tzu, Confucius, and Buddha / 23
The Harmony of Heaven and Earth 24
What to Expect from This Book 3
Sagehood 25
Areas of Philosophy 4
The Do-Nothing Sage: Lao-tzu 26
Philosophical Archetypes 5
The Way 27
Are Philosophers Always Men? 8 Philosophy and the Search for Truth 9 “Isn’t All This Just a Matter of Opinion?” 10 Wisdom, Knowledge, and Belief 12 Ignorance Is Not An Option 13
Summary of Main Points 14 Reflections 14 Philosophy Internet Resources 15
■ Overview of Classical Themes 17
People Cannot Stop Talking About It 28
The Way of Reversal 30 Prefer Yin to Yang 31 The Union of Relative Opposites 32
The Way of Inaction 33 The Social Sage: Confucius 35 The Teacher 36
Confucian Humanism and the Golden Mean 37 Virtue and Ceremony 39 The Example of the Chun-tzu 40
Nature and Convention 19
The Thread of Humanity 41
Contemporary Lessons from the Past 19
The Buddha 42
The Search for Excellence 21
Siddhartha the Seeker 43
The Search for Happiness 21
The Long Search 44
viii
■
contents
The Bodhisattva 45 The Death of the Buddha 46
Unsatisfactoriness and Karma 48 The Four Noble Truths 50 The Eightfold Path 51 The Buddha’s Legacy 54
CHAPTER
4
The Sophist: Protagoras / 79
The Advent of Professional Educators 82 The Sophists 83 Power and Education 83
What The Buddha Did Not Explain 55
Relativism 85
Commentary 57
Protagoras the Pragmatist 87 Moral Realism: Might Makes Right 91
Summary of Main Points 59
The Doctrine of the Superior Individual 92
Reflections 60
Commentary 94
Philosophy Internet Resources 60 Summary of Main Points 96 CHAPTER
3
The Presocratic Sophos / 61
Reflections 96 Philosophy Internet Resources 97
CHAPTER
5
Rational Discourse 64
The Problem of Change 66
The General Character of Socrates 101
From Sophos to Philosopher 62 The Search for a Common Principle 64
The Wise Man: Socrates / 99
The Logos 66
Barefoot in Athens 103
Appearance and Reality 68
A Most Unusual Father and Husband 105
The One 69
The Archetypal Individual 105
Being and Change 70
The Many 72 Mind 73
Atoms and the Void 74 Reason and Necessity 75 Nature and Convention 76
Commentary 76
The Teacher and His Teachings 108 The Dialectic 108 Socratic Irony 109
Socrates at Work 110 Sophos versus Sophist 111
The Unexamined Life 115 Socratic Ignorance 116 The Power of Human Wisdom 118
Summary of Main Points 77
The Physician of the Soul 120
Reflections 78
No One Knowingly Does Evil 121
Philosophy Internet Resources 78
Virtue Is Wisdom 122
contents
The Trial and Death of Socrates 124 The Death of Socrates 126
Commentary 129
The Origin of Democracy 158 The Pendulum of Imbalance 160 The Tyranny of Excess 162
Commentary 162 Summary of Main Points 129 Reflections 130
Summary of Main Points 163
Philosophy Internet Resources 131
Reflections 164 Philosophy Internet Resources 165
CHAPTER
6
The Philosopher-King: Plato / 133
Plato’s Life and Work 135
CHAPTER
7
The Naturalist: Aristotle / 167
The Decline of the Aristocracy 136
Works 168
Plato’s Disillusionment 137
Aristotle’s Life 169
The Academy 139
The Lyceum 170
Plato’s Epistemology 139 Plato’s Dualistic Solution 140
The Naturalist 171 Natural Changes 172
Knowledge and Being 141
Form 172
The Theory of Forms 141
Matter 174
What Are Forms? 142
Change 174
Why Plato Needed the Forms 144
Aristotle’s Hierarchy of Explanations 175
Knowledge and Opinion 144
The Four Causes 176
What Happens When We Disagree? 145
The Divided Line 146 Levels of Awareness 148
Material Cause 177 Formal Cause 177 Efficient Cause 178 Final Cause 178
The Simile of the Sun 149
Entelechy 179
The Allegory of the Cave 151
The Hierarchy of Souls 179
The Rule of the Wise 153
Natural Happiness 180
The Search for Justice 155
The Good 182
Function and Happiness 155
Teleological Thinking 183
The Philosopher’s Republic 156
The Science of the Good 184
The Parts of the Soul 156
Eudaimonia 185
The Cardinal Virtues 157
The Good Life Is a Process 186
■
ix
x
■
contents
Hitting the Mark 187 The Principle of the Mean 188 Character and Habit 189 Application of the Mean 190
Summary of Main Points 225 Reflections 225 Philosophy Internet Resources 226
Commentary 192 Summary of Main Points 193 Reflections 194 Philosophy Internet Resources 194
CHAPTER
9
The Scholar: Thomas Aquinas / 227
The God-Centered Universe 229 CHAPTER
8
The Stoic: Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius / 195
Hedonism 198 The Meaning of Life Is Pleasure 198
Epicureanism 199 Quality of Life 200
The Seeds of Change 229
Augustine: Between Two Worlds 230 Pride and Philosophy 233
The Life of Thomas Aquinas 234 The Dominican 235 The University of Paris 235 Albertus Magnus: The Universal Teacher 236 The Task of the Scholar 237
The Cynical Origins of Stoicism 202
The Wisdom of the Scholar 238
A Scout For Wisdom 203
Why Do People Argue About Spiritual Matters? 239
Epictetus: From Slave to Sage 205 Marcus Aurelius: Philosopher-King 207 The Fated Life 208
God and Natural Reason 240
Proving the Existence of God 240 The First Way: Motion 241
The Stoic Logos 209
The Second Way: Cause 242
The Disinterested Rational Will 210
The Third Way: Necessity 243
Stoic Wisdom 212 Control versus Influence 213 Some Things Are Not in Our Control 215 Some Things Are in Our Control 215 Relationships 217
The Fourth Way: Degree 244 The Fifth Way: Design 245
Commentary on the Five Ways 246 Complications for Natural Theology 248 The Problem of Evil 249
Commentary 252
Everything Has a Price 218 Suffering and Courage 219
Summary of Main Points 253
The World of Epictetus 221
Reflections 254
Commentary 223
Philosophy Internet Resources 254
contents
■ Overview of Modern Themes 255
Reason, Reformation, and Revolution 256
Summary of Main Points 287 Reflections 288 Philosophy Internet Resources 288
The Reformation 256 The Copernican Revolution 258
CHAPTER
Where Are We, Then? 259
CHAPTER
10
The Rationalist: René Descartes / 261
The Problem of Authority 262 René Descartes: The Solitary Intellect 263 Rationalism 265 Against Disorganized Thinking 265
The Method of Doubt 268 The Cartesian “I” and Methodic Doubt 269
11
The Skeptic: David Hume / 289
John Locke 291 Experience Is the Origin of All Ideas 293 Locke’s Rejection of Innate Ideas 293 Locke’s Dualism 294 Primary and Secondary Qualities 296 Locke’s Egocentric Predicament 296
George Berkeley 298 David Hume: The Scottish Skeptic 300 The Skeptical Masterpiece 301 An Honest Man 302
Hume’s Skeptical Empiricism 304
Standard of Truth 269
Impressions and Ideas 305
Innate Ideas 270
The Empirical Criterion of Meaning 306
The Cartesian Genesis 271 Maybe It’s All a Dream? 273
The Self 306 Personal Immortality 307
The Evil Genius 274
The Limits of Reason 308
Cogito, ergo sum 274
The Limits of Science 310
The Innate Idea of God 276 The Perfect Idea of Perfection 277 Descartes’ Ontological Argument 279 Reconstructing the World 280
The Cartesian Bridge 281
The Limits of Theology 311 The Limits of Ethics 313 The Facts, Just the Facts 314 Moral Sentiments 316 Rejection of Egoism 316
Commentary 318
Cartesian Dualism 282 The Mind-Body Problem 282
Summary of Main Points 319
From Cosmos To Machine 284
Reflections 320
Commentary 286
Philosophy Internet Resources 321
■
xi
xii
■
contents
CHAPTER
12
The Universalist: Immanuel Kant / 323
The Professor 325
The Principle of Utility 357 The Hedonic Calculus 358 The Egoistic Foundation of Social Concern 359 The Question Is, Can They Suffer? 360
The Solitary Writer 326
John Stuart Mill 361
A Scandal in Philosophy 327
Mill’s Crisis 362
Kant’s Copernican Revolution 329
Redemption and Balance 363
Critical Philosophy 331
Refined Utilitarianism 364
Phenomena and Noumena 332
Higher Pleasures 367
Transcendental Ideas 333
Lower Pleasures 368
The Objectivity of Experience 335
The Metaphysics of Morals 336 The Moral Law Within 337
Altruism and Happiness 368 Utilitarian Social Logic 370 Happiness and Mere Contentment 371
The Good Will 338
Mill’s Persistent Optimism 372
Inclinations, Wishes, Acts of Will 339
Commentary 374
Moral Duty 340
Summary of Main Points 376
Hypothetical Imperatives 341
Reflections 376
The Categorical Imperative 342
Philosophy Internet Resources 377
The Kingdom of Ends 343
A Kantian Theory of Justice 345
CHAPTER
14
Commentary 348
Summary of Main Points 350
The Prophet 380
What About Family Justice? 347
The Materialist: Karl Marx / 379
Reflections 351
Marx’s Hegelian Roots 381
Philosophy Internet Resources 351
Other Influences 382 The Wanderer 383
CHAPTER
13
The Utilitarian: John Stuart Mill / 353
Social Hedonism 355 Philosophy and Social Reform 356
Friedrich Engels 384 Vindication 385
Dialectical Materialism 386 Economic Determinism 387
Critique of Capitalism 390 The Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat 391 Co-Option and Class Struggle 393
contents
Alienation 396
CHAPTER
16
Commentary 399
Summary of Main Points 400
An American Original 434
Species-Life 397
Reflections 401 Philosophy Internet Resources 401 CHAPTER
15
The Existentialist: Søren Kierkegaard / 403
Søren Kierkegaard 405 The Family Curse 406 The Universal Formula 407 Kierkegaard’s? Works 408 The Christian 410 That Individual 410
Truth as Subjectivity 412 Objectivity as Untruth 414 The Present Age 415 An Age of Virtual Equality 416
Becoming A Subject 418 Stages On Life’s Way 422
The Pragmatist: William James / 433
The Education of a Philosopher 435
The Philosopher as Hero 437 The Philosopher as Advocate 438 Charles Sanders Peirce 439 Peirce’s “Pragmaticism” 439 Pragmatic Theory of Meaning 440
Pragmatism 440 Pragmatic Method and Philosophy 441 The Temper of Belief 443 The Will to Believe 445 Truth Happens to an Idea 445 The Dilemma of Determinism 447 The Inner Sense of Freedom 449 Morality and the Good 450 The Heroic Life 451
Pragmatic Religion 453 A Religious Dilemma 454
Truth Is Always Personal 455 Danger Signs 456
Commentary 457
The Aesthetic Stage 424
Summary of Main Points 459
The Ethical Stage 425
Reflections 459
The Religious Stage 426
Philosophy Internet Resources 460
Dangerous Stuff 429
CHAPTER
17
Summary of Main Points 431
Reflections 432
The Outsider 464
Commentary 430
Philosophy Internet Resources 432
The Anti-Philosopher: Friedrich Nietzsche 461
Beyond the Academy 465
■
xiii
xiv
■
contents
Tragic Optimism 465
Wittgenstein’s Turn 500
Zarathustra Speaks 466
Martin Heidegger 501
The Last Philosopher 469
Truth Is a Matter of Perspective 470
Roots and Ground 504
Attack on Objectivity 471
Thinking Has Come to Life Again 505
The Will to Power 473
Heidegger’s Children 507
The Diseases of Modernity 473 The Problem of Morality 474 The Problem of Generalized Accounts 476
God Is Dead 477 Overman 480 Slave Morality 481 Ressentiment 483
Master Morality 484 Amor Fati 486 Commentary 486
Phenomenology: The Science of Beings 509 Dasein 511 What Is the Meaning of Being? 513 Being With an Attitude 514 Existence 515 Ready-to-Hand 516 Moody Attunement 517
The Burden of Being Human 518 Anxiety 518 The “They” 520
Summary of Main Points 487
Idle Talk 521
Reflections 488
Authenticity 522
Philosophy Internet Resources 488
We Are A Conversation 523 Wither Philosophy? (A Pun) 525
CHAPTER
18
The Twentieth Century: Ludwig Wittgenstein and Martin Heidegger / 489
Two Approaches to Philosophy 492 Ludwig Wittgenstein 492 Cambridge and the Tractatus 493 The Philosophical Investigator 495
What Are You Talking About? 496 The Tractatus 497
Summary of Main Points 526 Reflections 528 Philosophy Internet Resources 528
Notes 529 Glossary 543 Bibliography of Interesting Sources 553 Index of margin Quotes 561 Index 565
PREFACE
Beginning with the second edition, each revision of Archetypes of Wisdom has benefited from an ongoing collaboration with readers ranging from highly specialized philosophers and philosophy teachers to students and nonstudents who read philosophy for pleasure and out of curiosity. In this light, the sixth edition of Archetypes of Wisdom sports three changes that will be immediately obvious to readers familiar with earlier editions. • Chapter 2: The Asian Sages: Lao-tzu, Confucius, and Buddha has been expanded to include the fuller treatment of Lao-tzu and Taoism that many instructors missed from earlier editions. I am pleased to see the “Old Boy” back. • Chapter 15: The Existentialist: Søren Kierkegaard is now devoted entirely to Kierkegaard. New “stages on life’s way” material gives students a clearer, richer, and more engaging idea of Kierkegaard’s project and provides instructors with natural triggers for class discussions. • Chapter 18: The Twentieth-Century: Ludwig Wittgenstein and Martin Heidegger is a brand-new look at two major philosophical figures presented in an engaging way that conforms to the overall thematic focus of Archetypes of Wisdom. • An online version of “Philosophy as a Way of Life” (Chapter 18 in the previous edition) is available to adopters at the companion Web site. As the title suggests, “Philosophy as a Way of Life,” is a look at contemporary public philosophers and philosophical advocates who see philosophy as more than an academic or theoretical practice. Included are Carol Gilligan, Martin Luther King, Pierre Hadot, Martha Nussbaum, and Peter Singer. These changes, combined with the careful excision, addition, and relocation of selected material, have been made to enhance and refresh Archetypes of Wisdom’s reader-praised search-for-wisdom motif without impairing its treatment of more technical philosophical issues. In other words, these and all other sixth-edition modifications have been made with an eye to preserving that which makes Archetypes of Wisdom unique among introductory philosophy textbooks, namely, the respect it pays to the common conception of philosophy as having something to do with living issues, with “the search for wisdom.” This proven approach demonstrates to students that
xvi
■
preface
philosophy, as both popularly and professionally conceived, is interesting and worthwhile for its own sake and as an important component of the search for meaning, as that is generally understood.
New and Continuing
Pedagogical Strengths
As in previous revisions, the entire text has been edited and modified with an emphasis on precision, historical flow, and useful cross-references. Here are some of the features that students, instructors, and general readers have consistently identified as contributing to Archetypes of Wisdom’s effectiveness and readability. Multiple levels of sophistication The philosophical material presented here varies in degree of difficulty. Sophisticated philosophical arguments are always presented as part of a cultural context. Philosophical passages are explained in an unobtrusive way that shows students how to read critically and carefully by asking them pointed questions and by connecting philosophical issues to students’ current interests in a natural, unforced, and nontrivializing way. Inviting, visually appealing format encourages readers of many levels Archetypes of Wisdom’s large format makes possible the illustrations, margin quotes, margin glossary, and boxed passages that draw readers of various levels in “just to look around.” Responses from students and instructors consistently indicate that many readers begin looking at pictures and reading margin quotes and boxed material out of curiosity and for pleasure only to find that they are learning something, too. Without a doubt, the most rewarding and touching comments I receive about Archetypes of Wisdom refer to the combined effects of these inviting features and take the form of “I never thought I would be able to understand philosophy, but this book has helped me to see that I can.” Integrated margin quotes and boxed passages From its inception, the carefully chosen and positioned margin quotes have been a particularly popular feature of Archetypes of Wisdom, cited by students and general readers alike as “fun” and “intriguing.” Many readers indicate that they learn a great deal just by reading margin quotes. Margin quotes come from the central figures in each chapter, other philosophers, and a variety of other sources. Margin quotes and boxed passages enrich the content of the main text and make excellent discussion material. Reading them first can provide a painless overview of a philosopher’s interests and related philosophical themes. The pull of stories Even the most uninterested and resistant students respond to personal anecdotes about philosophers. With the exception of the first chapter, every chapter contains a brief but engaging philosophical biography of one or two main figures. These biographies provide cultural and historical context for the philosophical ideas covered in the chapter by showing students how philosophers respond to important concerns of their times.
preface
Accessible depth Archetypes of Wisdom solves the problem of choosing between accessibility and depth by covering selected philosophers and philosophical ideas on a fundamental level. Careful juxtaposition of secondary commentary with primary source material of varying length and difficulty helps students learn how to read philosophical literature. Cultural breadth Archetypes of Wisdom blends traditional Western philosophy, non-Western and nontraditional philosophy, and contemporary issues. Whenever appropriate, the figure of the sophos (sage) is used to link traditional and academic philosophical concerns with “everyday meaning needs.” Nontraditional and non-Western selections include Asian humanism (philosophical Taoism, Confucianism, and Buddhism), existential iconoclasm (Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche), public philosophy (Henry David Thoreau and—online— Martin Luther King, Martha Nussbaum, and Peter Singer), philosophical feminism (Susan Bordo, Susan Moller Okin, and—online—Carol Gilligan), philosophy of religion (Augustine, Abu Hamid Muhammad al-Ghazali, Thomas Aquinas, David Hume, Søren Kierkegaard, William James, Friedrich Nietzsche), and postmodern philosophy (Friedrich Nietzsche, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger). A wide range of contemporary sources Archetypes of Wisdom contains a variety of contemporary sources that address philosophical issues from beyond academic philosophy. These show—rather than merely tell—students that philosophy occurs outside of philosophy class and under other guises. Flexible structure Each chapter is a self-contained unit. It is not necessary to cover sections in chronological order nor is it necessary to cover every chapter to have an effective class. Material not covered by the instructor can be used for independent writing assignments, group presentations, and the like. Overviews of philosophical themes Summaries of classical and modern philosophical themes give students a storylike preview of key philosophical issues and a sense of historical context and continuity. Philosophical Queries Philosophical Queries are topical questions that directly address the reader, prompting him or her to react critically to specific passages of text. They range from the personal to the controversial and can be readily modified for use as essay questions or to focus class discussion. Chapter Commentaries Chapters conclude with clearly identified brief commentaries that include general evaluations or personal reflections concerning the philosophical ideas covered in the chapter; often they connect chapter ideas to contemporary issues. Summary of Main Points Highlights of key ideas can be used as a handy preview, review, and discussion aid for each chapter. Reflections Each chapter contains questions keyed to the text. These range from specific to general and can function as review questions and as test or essay questions. Reflections can be easily modified for use as paper topics.
■
xvii
xviii
■
preface
Sources A Notes section documents all sources for primary source extracts. In-text Glossaries In addition to a handy margin glossary, which defines key terms in the margins, highlighting their importance and facilitating text reviews, an alphabetical glossary with chapter and page references makes it easy to locate key terms in the text. Bibliography of Interesting Sources This collection of books (and one movie) contains some overlooked gems, as well as the more usual philosophy texts. Index of Margin Quote Authors This popular feature helps students locate authors of interesting margin quotes featured throughout the text. Student-oriented Index Geared toward novice philosophers, the Index is extensively cross-referenced to help budding researchers and readers unfamiliar with philosophy find what they are looking for—and what they did not know they were looking for until they found it (serendipity).
Ancillary materials include Companion Web site This free Web site (http://philosophy.wadsworth.com/ Soccio6e) contains overviews of key concepts, quizzes, flash cards, a pronunciation guide, and lecture containing overviews of each chapter in PowerPoint®, all presented in an engaging interactive format that encourages active studying. Philosophy NOW This online program integrates content from the companion Web site with additional resources into a flexible course management system. It includes diagnostics and assessments and is free when packaged with the text. The visual preface describes this in more detail. Online Pronunciation Guide and Glossary This valuable feature combines an easily searchable online glossary with a handy pronunciation guide. In addition, easy-to-use flashcards provide students with an opportunity to see how well they know the terms. Multi-Media Manager This CD-ROM is meant to help instructors in the classroom. It includes PowerPoint® lectures and over 60 minutes of video footage of prominent philosophers discussing the major topics in philosophy. Also included on the CD-ROM are all instructor resources available electronically, such as the Instructor Manual and Examview tests. Online Instructor’s Manual with Tests In addition to the usual sections containing test questions and essay questions, this unique manual includes a section on the philosophy of testing (how to prepare tests), lecture and discussion tips for all chapters, tips for new philosophy teachers (which are useful for all teachers), and a discussion of the special pedagogical features of Archetypes of Wisdom. Few, if any, instructor aids are as practical or complete; this is not a cursory job, but a truly useful compendium of tips, timesaving classroom-tested test questions, and flexible lecture guides. Exam View Computerized test generation program.
preface
TurnItIn If you assign writing assignments, discourage plagiarism while educating your students with this innovative online program described in the front matter. How to Get the Most Out of Philosophy, 6e More than just a handbook for philosophy students, this success surprise of the first edition of Archetypes of Wisdom has grown in popularity with each revision. Today, thousands of instructors, counselors, and students use How to Get the Most Out of Philosophy as a general “student success” manual. How to Get the Most Out of Philosophy, 6e is available as a bundled supplement at a significantly reduced cost for adopters of Archetypes of Wisdom or as an independent text.
Acknowledgments I am grateful to Joe Frank Jones, III, Barton College; Martin Lecker, SUNY Rockland; Eric Morton, Fort Valley State University of Georgia; Ge Ling Shang, Grand Valley State University; Daniel E. Shannon, DePauw University; Michael H. Reed, Eastern Michigan University; Daniel Putman, University of Wisconsin-Fox Valley; Meneo A. Afonso, Cardinal Stritch University; Daniel Kendie, Henderson State University; Chung-yue Chang, Montclair State University; and Christina Tomczak, Cedar Valley College for their advice and insight regarding this revision. I am impressed with the care and thoroughness they put into their suggestions for improving the text. At Wadsworth Publishing Company, this is my second revision with Steve Wainwright. Steve’s positive energy, good humor, and wise counsel have made what could have been a chore into a rewarding experience. As I have said before, the more we work together, the more I find excuses just to chat with Steve because I like him. I look forward to our future projects. Assistant Editor for Philosophy & Religion Lee McCracken and Senior Production Project Manager Jerry Holloway also warrant my heartfelt appreciation for making sure that I had everything I needed to help with this revision. Like Steve, Lee and Jerry are pleasures to work with, and their attentiveness, good judgment, and care mean a great deal to me. In addition to his usually first-rate marketing efforts, Worth Hawes, Wadsworth’s philosophical Marketing Manager, encouraged me when I broached the subject of adding Martin Heidegger to the text and passed on well-informed suggestions regarding continental philosophy. Archetypes of Wisdom is a complicated book to put together, and once again Steve has assembled a great team, including two of my favorite collaborators, production manager Robin Hood and copy editor Joan Pendleton. Robin manages to coordinate artwork, text elements, and printing with aplomb and care. Joan, as ever, is my wise over-the-shoulder adviser. She does not just save me from many potentially embarrassing grammar gaffes, she teaches me to be a better writer than I would be on my own. In the Preface to the previous edition I wrote,“I have rarely had as much faith in a copy editor and hope we work together again.” My hope has
■
xix
xx
■
preface
been realized and now I can say, I have never had as much faith in a copyeditor and hope we can work together again on other projects. Once more, new drawings (Wittgenstein and Heidegger) from the pen of Dick Cole, one of my very favorite contemporary artists, add a touch of elegance and continuity to Archetypes of Wisdom. Lastly, I wish to thank photo researcher Billie Porter for the unstinting, informed, and energetic way in which she helped me find new photographs and art that reflect and enhance my vision for Archetypes of Wisdom. “Collaboration” may be an academic buzzword nowadays, but sometimes it is much more than that, as it has been for me during this revision.
A Brief Personal Note We want our lives to matter, to be about something. So we take one another’s measure. We count up honors, treasure, citations, waistlines—whatever. But sooner or later, something happens that changes our notion of what matters. We accomplish a hard-earned goal only to realize that the process has made it less desirable. We fall in or out of love, narrowly escape death, contract a catastrophic illness. Things, honors, health, social status come and go. We have moments of clarity that suggest that, when all is said and done, what matters most in life are the people who constitute our families, understood in the broadest sense to include our friends. There is, of course, nothing new in that insight, if that is what it is. Just the opposite, in fact. The importance of kinship and the brevity of life are found in the earliest reflections of our ancestors. What may be “new” for each person is the awareness that, in our longings to belong and to linger a while, we are more alike than not, whether we care to admit it, or not. Since the last revision, I have had to say good-bye to two remarkable “philosophical” men, men haunted and refined in the fire of war, men who turned suffering into service. Jim Harrell (1943–2004) was one of those larger-than-life figures who come along just when you need them to, and stay the course, no matter how rough it gets. Jimbo became a son to my parents, an uncle to my sisters, a brother to my brother, and, in so doing, a brother to me. I will be forever grateful for the way Admiral James Stockdale (1923–2005) reached out to me when I included him in the first edition of this book. From our first conversation, this renowned figure treated me as a friend and colleague. Jim was unselfish with his time and his work. As much as I admire his courage and his writing, I admire his generosity and kindness more—and that of his widow Sybil. As always—literally, always—I thank my friends and family for encouraging and indulging my interest in philosophy and for putting up with my rants and “lectures.” I thank each one of you for reminding me of what matters.
ARCHETYPES OF WISDOM
This page intentionally left blank
Grey-eyed athena sent them a favorable breeze, a fresh wind, singing over the wine-dark sea. Homer
Copyright 2007 Thomson Learning, Inc. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.
1
PHILOSOPHY AND THE SEARCH FOR WISDOM
philosophy From Greek roots meaning “the love of wisdom.”
First learn, then form opinions. THE TALMUD
P
hilosophy
is already an important part of your life, whether you know it or not. The word philosophy comes from Greek roots meaning “the love of wisdom.” The earliest philosophers were considered wise men and women, or sages, because they devoted themselves to asking “big questions”: What is the meaning of life? Where did everything come from? What is the nature of reality? For a long time, most philosophers were wisdomseeking amateurs. That is, philosophy was a way of living for them, not a way of making a living. (The original meaning of amateur is one who is motivated by love, rather than by profit.) We use the term philosophy in a similar sense when we think of a person’s basic philosophy as the code of values and beliefs by which someone lives. Sometimes we talk about Abby’s philosophy of cooking or Mikey’s philosophy of betting on the horses. In such instances, we are thinking of philosophy as involving general principles or guidelines. Technically, that’s known as having a philosophy; it is not the same thing as being a philosopher. You don’t have to be a philosopher to ask philosophical questions, you just have to be a naturally curious and thoughtful person. Here’s just a sampling of the kinds of questions philosophers study: • Does God exist? • What’s the meaning of life? • Why do innocent people suffer?
Beggars get handouts before philosophers because people have some idea of what it’s like to be blind and lame. DIOGENES
• Is everything a matter of opinion? • Are all people really “equal,” and if so, in what sense? • What is the best form of government? • Is it better to try to make the majority happy at the expense of the few, or make the few happy at the expense of the many? • How are minds connected to bodies? • Is there one standard of right and wrong for everyone, or are moral standards relative? • Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? • Does might make right? • Is objectivity possible? Desirable?
2
philosophy and the search for wisdom
■
3
Surely, Life Is Not Merely a Job Why do we go through the struggle to be educated? Is it merely in order to pass some examinations and get a job? Or is it the function of education to prepare us while we are young to understand the whole process of life? Having a job and earning one’s livelihood is necessary—but is that all? Are we being educated only for that? Surely, life is not merely a job, an occupation; life is wide and profound, it is a great mystery, a vast realm in which we function as human
beings. If we merely prepare ourselves to earn a livelihood, we shall miss the whole point of life; and to understand life is much more important than merely to prepare for examinations and become very proficient in mathematics, physics, or what you will. Jiddu Krishnamurti, from “The Function of Education,” quoted in Daniel Kolak and Raymond Martin, The Experience of Philosophy (Belmont, Calif.:Wadsworth, 1990), pp. 20–21.
What to Expect from This Book
Although the idea of studying selected highlights of nearly three thousand years of (mostly) Western philosophizing may seem exhausting, this is not meant to be an exhaustive history of philosophy or survey of philosophical topics. That is, Archetypes of Wisdom is not meant to be “complete,” covering every significant philosopher or every significant contribution made by the philosophers it does include. Rather, it’s meant to be a representative and inviting introduction to interesting and important questions of value, meaning, and knowledge and the cultural conditions that gave rise to them. If you’re reading this book as part of an academic course, I recommend treating your introduction to philosophy as an opportunity to distinguish between saying philosophical-sounding things and actually philosophizing. Perhaps the chief difference between just talking about philosophical ideas and actually philosophizing about them involves the degree of rigor and discipline you apply to your reflections. We can say, then, that, generally, philosophy consists of careful reasoning about certain kinds of issues. Philosophical thinking includes careful assessment of terms, evaluation of logical reasoning, willingness to make refined distinctions, and so forth. Philosophers are especially interested in the arguments (reasons) offered to support our ideas. Philosophical issues concern ultimate values, general principles, the nature of reality, knowledge, justice, happiness, truth, God, beauty, and morality. Philosophy addresses questions that other subjects do not address at all, and it addresses them in a more thorough way. That’s not to say, however, that we can tell whether or not a person is a philosopher just by their “job description.” Physicists, psychologists, physicians, literary critics, artists, poets, novelists, soldiers, housewives—all sorts of folks—engage in philosophical reflection without necessarily being labeled as philosophers. The quality of philosophical reasoning should concern us most, rather than the label “philosopher.” Because of their nature, philosophical questions cannot be answered in the way that a mathematical or factual question can be answered with “4” or “the year
It is said that when Empedocles told Xenophanes that it was impossible to find a wise man, Xenophanes replied: “Naturally, for it takes a wise man to recognize a wise man.”
The effect of life in society is to complicate our existence, making us forget who we really are by causing us to become obsessed with what we are not. CHUANG-TZU
4
■
chapter 1
Image not available due to copyright restrictions
1066.” Certain questions must be asked and answered anew by each culture and by any person who awakens to what Plato and Aristotle called the philosophical sense of wonder. Indeed, thoughtful individuals wrestle with philosophical questions all their lives.
Philosophical Query Of what use is a philosopher who doesn’t hurt anybody’s feelings? DIOGENES
•••••• So what do you think? If you had the choice of being “happy” and blissfully ignorant or philosophically concerned but not always “happy,” which would you choose? Why?
Areas of Philosophy
In practice, philosophy consists of the systematic, comprehensive study of certain questions that center on meaning, interpretation, evaluation, and logical or rational consistency. The primary areas of philosophy are listed here: Without philosophy we would be little above the animals. VOLTAIRE
Can we not understand that all the outward tinkerings and improvements do not touch man’s inner nature, and that everything ultimately depends upon whether the man who wields the science and the techniques is capable of responsibility or not? C. G. JUNG
• Metaphysics encompasses the study of what is sometimes termed “ultimate
reality.” As such, metaphysics raises questions about reality that go beyond sense experience, beyond ordinary science. Metaphysical questions involve free will, the mind-body relationship, supernatural existence, personal immortality, and the nature of being. Some philosophers (see Chapters 11, 12, 14, and 16–18) question the very possibility of a reality beyond human experience, while others (see Chapters 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, and 10) base their philosophies on metaphysical notions. • Epistemology, from the Greek for “knowledge,” is the branch of philosophy
that asks questions about knowledge, its nature and origins, and whether or not it is even possible. Epistemological questions involve standards of evidence, truth, belief, sources of knowledge, gradations of knowledge, memory, and perception. Epistemological issues cut across all other branches of philosophy. (See, in particular, Chapters 2–7, 9–12, and 14–18.) • Ethics, from the Greek word ethos, encompasses the study of moral prob-
lems, practical reasoning, right and wrong, good and bad, virtues and vices, character, moral duty, and related issues involving the nature, origins, and
philosophy and the search for wisdom
scope of moral values. Today, it is not uncommon for ethicists to specialize in medical ethics, business ethics, environmental ethics, academic ethics, issues of ethnicity and gender, and the nature of the good life. Ethical issues include truth-telling, relativism, and universality. (See Chapters 2, 4–8, 11–14, 17, and 18.) • Social and political philosophy are concerned with the nature and origins of the state (government), sovereignty, the exercise of power, the effects of social institutions on individuals, ethnicity, gender, social status, and the strengths and weaknesses of different types of societies. (See Chapters 2, 5, 6, 8, 13, 14, 17, and 18.)
■
5
Specialization is the price we pay for the advancement of knowledge. A price, because the path of specialization leads away from the ordinary and concrete acts of understanding in terms of which man actually lives his day-to-day life. WILLIAM BARRETT
Other important areas of philosophy include logic, the study of the rules of correct reasoning; axiology, the study of values; aesthetics, the study of perceptions, feelings, judgments, and ideas associated with the appreciation of beauty, art, and objects in general; and ontology, the study of being and what it means to “Exist.” Philosophers sometimes concentrate on only one of these primary areas. Today some philosophers go so far as to reject whole areas of philosophy as unfit for study. For example, a logician might view metaphysics as overly abstract and confused; a moral philosopher might see the study of symbolic logic as belonging to mathematics, rather than philosophy. Whenever philosophers concern themselves with the meaning of life or the general search for wisdom, however, all of these primary areas are involved, even if some are not dealt with explicitly. Contemporary academic philosophers tend to specialize even within these areas, concentrating on historical periods; certain philosophers; the philosophy of music, religion, or law; or particular philosophical issues, such as What is justice? Is objectivity possible? More than two hundred areas of specialization are currently listed by the Philosophical Documentation Center, a professional organization dedicated to compiling and disseminating research data and articles about philosophy.
Philosophical Archetypes
In the ancient world, the wise person was known as the sage; in parts of Asia, a bodhisattva, yogi, or guru; in parts of Africa, a witch doctor; among Native Americans and the nomadic tribes of Asia, a shaman. In the Bible, the prophets were people of wisdom. In many cultures, the “grandmother” or “grandfather” or some other elder represents the basic image of the wise person. In the West, the wise person is often depicted as a male, but not always. In cartoons, the “wise man” is often caricatured as an oddball or hermit wearing a robe of some sort, maybe carrying a staff, and sporting a long white beard. Why do you suppose that is? Because even cartoonists tap into this nearly universal image—and we recognize it. This kind of basic image is sometimes referred to as an archetype. According to psychologist C. G. Jung (1875–1961), an archetype is an image that has been shared by the whole human race from the earliest times. In its more traditional sense, an archetype represents our conception of the essence of a certain kind of
archetype Basic image that represents our conception of the essence of a certain type of person; according to psychologist C. G. Jung, some of the images have been shared by the whole human race from the earliest times.
chapter 1
© Leonard Freed/Magnum Photos
■
© Scala/Art Resource, NY
6
Archetypes of wisdom appear in many forms, from the rational Greek sophos (left) to the whirling Sufi dervish (right).
archetype (philosophical) A philosopher who represents an original or influential point of view in a way that significantly affects philosophers and nonphilosophers: cynic, saint, pessimist, optimist, atheist, rationalist, idealist, and so on.
It is no use at all to learn a list of archetypes by heart. Archetypes are complexes of experience that come upon us like fate, and their effects are felt most in our personal life. C. G. JUNG
person. An archetype is a fundamental, original model of some type: mother, warrior, trickster, cynic, saint, pessimist, optimist, atheist, rationalist, idealist, and so on. A philosophical archetype is a philosopher who expresses an original or influential point of view in a way that significantly affects subsequent philosophers and nonphilosophers. The difference between an archetype and an ideal is that the archetype need not be good or perfect. The difference between an archetype and a stereotype is in their depth. A stereotype is a simplistic distortion of a type of person. An archetype, by contrast, is a powerful representation of a fundamental response to universal experiences. Archetypes exemplify essential ways of coping with the universal aspects of life (suffering, death, loss, society, wealth, knowledge, love, purpose) in uncommonly pure ways. There are archetypes of evil as well as good and of fools as well as of wise people. This introduction to philosophy is organized around philosophical archetypes. Even people who have not studied philosophy recognize the basic qualities of many philosophical archetypes. Most likely you have already encountered individuals who resemble some of them. Two brief examples will show you what I mean. One philosophical archetype is the skeptic (Chapter 11). Skeptics believe that any claim to knowledge must be personally verified by their own sensory experience. They want to see, touch, taste, or measure everything. The New Testament contains an excellent example of this archetype in the person of “Doubting” Thomas, the disciple who would not believe that Jesus had risen from the grave until he carefully examined Jesus’wounds for himself. Another philosophical archetype is the utilitarian (Chapter 13). Utilitarians believe that pain is inherently bad, that pleasure is inherently good, and that all creatures strive to be as happy as possible. Thus, utilitarians argue that
philosophy and the search for wisdom
■
7
It Is a Shameful Question The idea that devoting time to philosophy distracts us from “practical” concerns is an old one. And, of course, the very suggestion that philosophy is not as “useful” or “practical” as other subjects or activities is itself a philosophical idea that requires justification. In the following passage, the prolific philosophical historian Will Durant challenges the notion that being “useful” is supremely important: The busy reader will ask, is all this philosophy useful? It is a shameful question: We do not ask it of poetry, which is also an imaginative construction of a world incompletely known. If poetry reveals to us the beauty our untaught eyes have missed, and philosophy gives us the wisdom to understand and forgive, it is enough, and more than the world’s wealth. Philosophy will not fatten our purses, nor lift us to dizzy dignities in a democratic state; it may even make us a little careless of these things. For what if
we should fatten our purses, or rise to high office, and yet all the while remain ignorantly naive, coarsely unfurnished in the mind, brutal in behavior, unstable in character, chaotic in desire, and blindly miserable? . . . Perhaps philosophy will give us, if we are faithful to it, a healing unity of soul. We are so slovenly and self-contradictory in our thinking; it may be that we shall clarify ourselves, and pull ourselves together into consistency, and be ashamed to harbor contradictory desires or beliefs. And through unity of mind may come that unity of purpose and character which makes a personality, and lends some order and dignity to our existence. Will Durant, The Mansions of Philosophy (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1929), p. x.
our private and communal behavior should always maximize pleasure and minimize pain. You might recognize their famous formula: Always act to produce the greatest possible happiness for the greatest number of people. You probably also recognize utilitarian thinking in all sorts of “majority rules” reasoning. The philosophers we will study include these two archetypes as well as exemplars of other significant philosophical schools and orientations. Philosophical archetypes are often the founders of the schools they represent, but not always. Sometimes the archetypal representatives of a philosophy are individuals who refine and develop others’ ideas. In addition to their significance in the history of philosophy, archetypes confront universally important philosophical questions in ways that continue to be interesting and engaging. A special virtue of archetypal figures is the intensity and purity of their belief in their philosophies. Philosophical archetypes are strict advocates of a philosophical worldview or philosophical method. The intensity with which they hold to their views, combined with exceptional philosophical depth and rigor, almost always challenges our own, often unclarified, beliefs—whether we want to be challenged or not. Never fear. You alone always remain responsible for what you choose to believe, reject, or modify. Learning about philosophical archetypes is a good way to get an initial picture of a philosophical orientation and the kinds of philosophers who are drawn to it. Learning about philosophical archetypes may also give you a better sense of your own present philosophy of life, or at least some aspects of it.
The only important problem of philosophy, the only problem which concerns us and our fellow men, is the problem of the wisdom of living. Wisdom is not wisdom unless it knows its own subject and scope. LIN YUTANG
8
■
chapter 1
Are Philosophers Always Men?
I see many people die because they judge that life is not worth living. I see others paradoxically getting killed for the ideas and illusions that give them a reason for living (what is called a reason for living is also an excellent reason for dying). I therefore conclude that the meaning of life is the most urgent of questions. ALBERT CAMUS
One may view the history of philosophy as a history of heresy. WALTER KAUFMANN
I do not know how to teach philosophy without becoming a disturber of the peace. BARUCH SPINOZA
The history of Western philosophy contains mostly male representatives, most of them of European ancestry. This has led to the sarcastic but important charge that Western philosophy is nothing but the study of “dead white males.” Even though increasing numbers of women are entering the ranks of professional philosophy today, men still outnumber women among professional philosophers. Although throughout history individual women were recognized for their insight and brilliance, most of them remained—or were kept—outside of the formal history of philosophy. In our own times, the recognition of women philosophers is improving: Susanne Langer, L. Susan Stebbing, Simone de Beauvoir, Simone Weil, Ayn Rand, Christina Hoff Sommers, Alison Jaggar, Susan Moller Okin, and Martha Nussbaum, among many others, have achieved renown as philosophers.Women philosophers are still generally not as well known, however, as women in fields such as psychology. (The fact that women are still underrepresented in many fields underscores the serious consequences that pervasive cultural prejudices have on the search for truth.) Because, until recently, Western philosophy has been dominated by an emphasis on logical reasoning and written argument, other expressions of philosophical insight have been given less attention. Until the eighteenth century, most Western philosophers represented a small class of highly educated men, able to support themselves independently or associated with the Church or some other source of income. Only with the emergence of great public universities were higher education and philosophy open to people from other backgrounds. And even then, philosophers tended to remain members of an educated male elite. In the following passage, Mary Ellen Waithe, the head of a team of scholars that has compiled a valuable series called A History of Women Philosophers, notes firsthand the difficulty of filling in some of the gaps in the history of philosophy: On a sweltering October afternoon in 1980 . . . I sought comfort in the basement library of City University of New York’s Graduate Center. I came upon a reference to a work by Aegidius Menagius [on the history of women philosophers] published in 1690 and 1692. I had never heard of any women philosophers prior to the 20th century with the exceptions of Queen Christina of Sweden, known as Descartes’ student, and Hildegard von Bingen, who lived in the 12th century. . . . It took sixteen months to obtain a copy of Menagius’ book. . . . As it turns out, many of the women he listed as philosophers were astronomers, astrologers, gynecologists, or simply relatives of male philosophers. Nevertheless, the list of women alleged to have been philosophers was impressive. . . . By the end of 1981 I had concluded that the accomplishments of some one hundred or more women philosophers had been omitted from the standard philosophic reference works and histories of philosophy. Just check sources such as The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Copleston, Zeller, Bury, Grote and others. If the women are mentioned at all, it is in passing, in a footnote.1
philosophy and the search for wisdom
■
9
The Prejudices of Practical Men If we are not to fail in our endeavour to determine the value of philosophy, we must first free our minds from the prejudices of what are wrongly called “practical” men. The “practical” man, as this word is often used, is one who recognizes only material needs, who realizes that men must have food for the body, but is oblivious of the necessity of providing food for the mind. If all men were well off, if poverty and disease had been reduced to their lowest possible point, there would still remain much to be done to produce a valuable society; and even in the existing world the goods of the mind are at least as important as the goods of the body. It is exclusively among the goods of the mind that the value of philosophy is to be found; and only those who are not indifferent to these goods can be persuaded that the study of philosophy is not a waste of time.
. . . Philosophy is to be studied, not for the sake of any definite answers to its questions, since no definite answers can, as a rule, be known to be true, but rather for the sake of the questions themselves; because these questions enlarge our conception of what is possible, enrich our intellectual imagination and diminish the dogmatic assurance which closes the mind against speculation; but above all because, through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind also is rendered great, and becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good. Bertrand Russell, The Problems of Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1912), selections from Chapters 1, 14, and 15.
There is no escaping the fact that Western philosophy has been predominantly male-influenced throughout its history, shaped by a strong preference for rational and objective evidence rather than by more holistic and intuitive approaches to problems. The pervasiveness of this orientation makes it imperative that we acknowledge this problem. Chapters 10, 12, and 14 through 18 include some intriguing critiques of rationalism and universalism.
Philosophy and the Search for Truth
Even with its cultural limits and biases, philosophy is perhaps the most “open” of all subjects. Its primary goals are clarity of expression and thought, and its chief components are reason, insight, contemplation, and experience. No question or point of view is off-limits. The best philosophers—no matter what their personal beliefs—defer to the most compelling arguments regardless of their origins. Such important philosophers as Plato, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, John Stuart Mill, Søren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Martin Heidegger, to name but a few, radically questioned and revised their own thinking over the course of their lives, reacting to what they saw as more compelling evidence. Today, the philosophical arguments raised by women and other philosophical “outsiders” have expanded the ever-growing philosophical community. The history of philosophy is, in the words of Walter Kaufmann, the history of heresy. There has always been a powerful philosophical tradition that challenges the status quo and confronts social institutions. In recent times, this tradition has
Philosophy’s first promise is a sense of participation, of belonging to mankind, being a member of society. SENECA
10
■
chapter 1
The most important thing that we can learn to do today is think for ourselves. MALCOLM X
Reason or a halter. DIOGENES
found effective and powerful expression among philosophers concerned with the environment, animal rights, family structure, racism, and sexism. Because archetypal figures exert such far-reaching influence, it is hard to predict who they will be with any certainty. That’s understandable—we cannot merely assign archetypal status to a person, no matter how tempting that seems. In this regard, philosophy is no different from other fields. History teaches us that most of any given era’s significant and popular figures don’t usually retain their significance much beyond their own lifetimes. So predicting the emergence of archetypal philosophers must be approached with caution. In Chapter 18, we will look at some important twentieth-century philosophers and reflect on the persistence of philosophical questions. The history of philosophy is a living thing. It is still being written. Perhaps you will contribute to it. Eventually all facets of wisdom may be equally welcome— and future textbooks will not have sections like this one. And as you will quickly see, the ultimate issue is not who said something or who said it first, but whether it is true and worthwhile. Wisdom, it seems, transcends color, gender, social class, and ethnicity.
“Isn’t All This Just a Matter of Opinion?”
relativism Belief that knowledge is determined by specific qualities of the observer, including age, ethnicity, gender, cultural conditioning.
Does it ever occur to you that there’s no way to settle the kinds of philosophical issues we have been discussing because they’re only about beliefs and opinions? Perhaps you believe that “What’s right for someone else might not be right for me. It’s best to just let others believe whatever they want, and I’ll believe whatever I want.” This kind of thinking is a form of “mellow” relativism. Relativism is the belief that knowledge is determined by specific qualities of the observer. In other words, absolute (universal) knowledge of the truth is impossible—one opinion is as good as another. People who see themselves as “sophisticated” sometimes adopt a relativistic attitude toward such “philosophical” questions as “What is the meaning of life?” or “Is democracy the best form of government?” They reason that there are nearly as many answers to such questions as there are lifestyles, religions, cultures, and individuals. Then, too, relativists can also point to the seemingly endless differences of opinion about abortion, the right to die, capital punishment, the existence and nature of God, affirmative action, immigration policies, the president’s moral character, or the greatest rock and roll singer or basketball player in history. We haven’t even gotten to evolution versus intelligent design, alien autopsies, whether men are from Mars and women are from Venus, whether one ethnicity or gender is “superior” to another, or whether homosexuals are fit to raise children. With all this diversity of opinion, the relativist wonders how we can ever agree on who is really wise. Amateur relativists can be heard saying things like, “Well, there’s no way to decide if this particular affirmative action policy is better than that one. African Americans, women, and members of other protected classes favor it because
philosophy and the search for wisdom
they’ll get first crack at all the good jobs, government grants, and scholarships. Middle-aged white males don’t like it because now it’s their turn to ride in the back of the social bus. It’s always a matter of perspective.” Relativists say things like, “Professor, I think my essay grade is unfair. It’s only your opinion. I mean this is not like science or math. Here in philosophy class, there’s no real way to determine which opinion about Plato’s theory of justice is true. Just because you’ve got a Ph.D. doesn’t mean you’re right. You’re still just giving your opinion.” Somewhat more sophisticated versions of this sort of relativistic reasoning are made by some social scientists, who argue that there is no way for one culture to judge another. In America, for instance, most of us think it’s wrong to treat women as second-class citizens who should defer to their fathers, brothers, and husbands. But in some Middle Eastern countries, the notion that women should have social equality is viewed as absolutely wrong. Who are we, the relativist asks, to judge a completely different way of life? In the following passage, the sociologist James Q.Wilson describes his experiences with relativism in the classroom. In my classes, college students asked to judge a distant people, practice, or event will warn one another and me not to be “judgmental” or to “impose your values on other people.” These remarks are most often heard when they are discussing individual “lifestyles,” the modern, “nonjudgmental” word for what used to be called character. . . . If asked to defend their admonitions against “being judgmental,” the students sometimes respond by arguing that moral judgments are arbitrary, but more often they stress the importance of tolerance and fair play, which, in turn, require understanding and even compassion. Do not condemn some practice—say, drug use or unconventional sexuality—that ought to be a matter of personal choice; do not criticize some group—say, ghetto rioters—whom you do not know and whose beliefs and experiences you do not understand. . . . These students are decent people. In most respects, their lives are exemplary. Thus it was all the more shocking when, during a class in which we were discussing people who at great risk to themselves had helped European Jews during the Holocaust, I found that there was no general agreement that those guilty of the Holocaust itself were guilty of a moral horror. “It all depends on your perspective,” one said. “I’d first have to see those events through the eyes of people affected by them,” another remarked. No doubt some perpetrators were caught up in that barbaric episode for reasons that we might understand and even excuse.What worried me was not that the students were prepared to accept some excuses, but that they began their moral reasoning on the subject by searching for excuses. They seemed to assume that one approaches a moral question by taking a relativist position and asking, “How, given the interests and values of another person, might we explain what happened?” . . . To . . . many of my students . . . “What counts as a decent human being is relative to historical circumstance, a matter of transient consensus about what attitudes are normal and what practices are unjust.”2
Wilson claims that such radical relativism is “rampant” among college students (and many professors) today. That’s difficult to say. Regardless of how
■
11
Knowledge is power, but only wisdom is liberty. WILL DURANT
There is no such thing as a crime of thought. There are only crimes of action. CLARENCE DARROW
There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation. HERBERT SPENCER
12
■
chapter 1
The recipe for perpetual ignorance is: be satisfied with your opinions and content with your knowledge. ELBERT HUBBARD
wisdom Fundamental understanding of reality as it relates to living a good life; reasonable and practical, focusing on the true circumstances and character of each individual; good judgment about complex situations involving reflection, insight, and a plausible conception of the human condition.
knowledge True belief.
knowledge (theoretical) The accurate compilation and assessment of factual and systematic relationships.
knowledge (practical) The skills needed to do things like play the piano, use a band saw, remove a tumor, or bake a cake.
common relativism is, the issue of relativism remains controversial. Sometimes relativism is advocated as a form of tolerance, as in the example Wilson cites. Conflicts between relativists and nonrelativists are found throughout the history of philosophy. Indeed, the first major Western philosopher, Socrates, emerged as a public figure partly because of his struggles with early relativists, known as sophists. The struggle between relativists and nonrelativists is one of the most exciting in the history of ideas. We’ll study it in Chapters 4, 5, and 6, and then again toward the end of our survey of philosophy in Chapters 12 and 15–18. (By the way, just about every relativist I have met argues for his relativism or at least tries to give reasons why my nonrelativism is “inferior,” “misguided,” “mistaken,” or “intolerant.” As if that weren’t odd enough, the relativist often gets angry when I simply point out that, according to his own relativistic claims, it is impossible for his views to be “righter” than mine. After all, relativism is “just his opinion.”) Whether or not we’re relativists, let’s do our best to give philosophers a chance to make their cases before we accept or reject them.
Wisdom, Knowledge, and Belief
The chief goal of wisdom is a fundamental understanding of reality as it relates to living a good life. At its core, wisdom is reasonable and practical, focusing on the true circumstances and character of each individual. We might say then, that wisdom is good judgment about complex situations. Consequently, wisdom involves reflection, insight, a capacity to learn from experience, and some plausible conception of the human condition. Unlike forms of knowledge that require formal education and specialized intelligence, wisdom has been associated with experience in a way that theoretical and intellectual knowledge have not. That may be why wisdom is so often associated with the elders of a tribe or clan. Yet, clearly, age alone cannot guarantee wisdom, nor can intelligence. Wisdom has also been associated with personal virtue far more than knowledge has. Philosophers generally agree that knowledge is some form of true belief. Questions then arise as to how to distinguish true belief from mistaken belief; and, as you might expect, different philosophers give different answers involving the roles of reason, perception, experience, intuition, and social agreement in this process. Some philosophers go so far as to deny the possibility of knowledge entirely. (See Chapters 3, 4, 6, 10, 11, 15–18.) Philosophers also distinguish between theoretical and practical knowledge. Theoretical knowledge involves the accurate compilation and assessment of factual and systematic information and relationships. Practical knowledge consists of skills needed to do things like play the piano, use a band saw, remove a tumor, or bake a cake. Depending on their nature, evaluating knowledge claims involves logical argumentation, scientific experiments and predictions, or the demonstration of some skillful performance. It would seem, then, that to know X means, first, that X actually is true; second, that I believe X to be true; and third, that I can justify or establish my belief in X by providing “adequate evidence.”
philosophy and the search for wisdom
Knowledge claims raise some interesting and thorny questions. For example: Is a strong personal feeling adequate evidence? How much proof is enough? According to whose criteria? Philosophers demand that we provide reasons to justify our knowledge claims. In contrast to knowledge, belief refers to the subjective mental acceptance that a claim is true. Beliefs—unlike knowledge—need not be true. Because beliefs are subjective mental states, it is possible to be firmly convinced that a belief is correct when it is not. On the other hand, sometimes our beliefs are true, but we’re unable to offer adequate evidence for them. Although beliefs can be either true or false, technically speaking, “false knowledge” is impossible. The very idea is self-contradictory. For the most part, our everyday language reflects an understanding of this important distinction.We rarely say “I had false knowledge that peach pits boost intelligence.” Instead, we say something like “I had pretty good reasons to think that peach pits boost intelligence, but I’ve since learned that I was mistaken.” Or we say “I used to believe that peach pits boost intelligence, but now I know better.” In other words, sometimes what we thought we knew turns out to be mistaken. Some beliefs are more reasonable than others, and there’s a big difference between informed belief and mere belief. Mere belief refers to a conviction that something is true for which the only evidence is the conviction itself. If that sounds circular, it’s because it is. Mere belief “validates itself”—or tries to. Most philosophers and scientists believe that truth cannot be reduced to merely believing something. For example, you do not have cancer just because you believe that you do. The best way to distinguish reliable beliefs from problematic ones is to subject important ideas to careful scrutiny. To a certain extent, we can, and must, do this for ourselves.
■
13
belief Conviction or trust that a claim is true; an individual’s subjective mental state; distinct from knowledge.
belief (mere) A conviction that something is true for which the only evidence is the sincerity of the believer.
Ignorance Is Not an Option Because we’re all limited by our experiences, abilities, and preferences, we can’t just rely on our own untested thinking. We need to consider others’ ideas and we need to subject our beliefs to the scrutiny of others. In the realm of philosophy, we would be wise to take advantage of those thinkers and ideas that have stood the “test of time and significance.” (Of course, we don’t want to accept the arguments of philosophers just because they’re considered “great” or important.) Even though we need to think for ourselves, impulsively or defensively rejecting important philosophical arguments before we’ve really thought about them is foolish—and arrogant. It’s foolish because we can’t really know what value there is in a position if we don’t give it fair hearing. It’s arrogant because summarily rejecting (or mocking) ideas that have influenced careful thinkers from the past and present implies that without any background knowledge we know more than philosophers, scientists, and theologians who’ve devoted years of study to these issues. More subtly, we can shut off challenging questions by prejudging them, by being inattentive and bored when they come up, or by mocking other points of view without investigating them. When we do this, we put ourselves in the position of holding onto a belief regardless of the facts. In such a state, we become
Since ignorance is no guarantee of security, and in fact only makes our insecurity still worse, it is probably better despite our fear to know where the danger lies. To ask the right question is already half the solution of a problem. . . . Discerning persons have realized for some time that external . . . conditions, of whatever kind, are only . . . jumpingoff grounds, for the real dangers that threaten our lives. C. G. JUNG
14
■
chapter 1
willed ignorance An attitude of indifference to the possibility of error or enlightenment that holds on to beliefs regardless of the facts.
indifferent to the possibility of error or enlightenment. Willed ignorance is the name of this closed-minded attitude, and it is as opposite from the love of wisdom as any attitude I can think of. For most of us, ignorance is not a serious option. As thoughtful people, our choices are not between philosophical indifference and philosophical inquiry, but between a life lived consciously and fully or a life that just happens. Because of its fragility and finiteness, life is just too important not to philosophize about—and we know it.
SUMMARY OF MAIN POINTS • The word philosophy comes from Greek roots
meaning “the love of wisdom.” Philosophy in the archetypal sense is an activity as well as a fixed body of knowledge. A philosopher is a lover of wisdom, someone who has a compelling need to pursue wisdom. Areas of philosophy include metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, ethics, aesthetics, political philosophy, social philosophy, and logic. • Philosophical archetypes are philosophers who express an original or influential point of view in a way that significantly affects subsequent philosophers and nonphilosophers. • The history of Western philosophy has been dominated by males of European ancestry, but increasing interest in women philosophers is expanding the scope and nature of philosophy. • The chief goal of wisdom is a fundamental understanding of reality as it relates to living a good life. Wisdom is reasonable and practical, focusing on the true circumstances and character of each individual; wisdom is good judgment about complex situations
that involves reflection, insight, and some plausible conception of the human condition. • Philosophers generally agree that knowledge is some form of true belief. This raises questions about distinguishing true belief from mistaken belief; and different philosophers give different weights to the roles reason, perception, experience, intuition, and social agreement play in this process. Some philosophers deny the possibility of knowledge entirely. • Philosophers distinguish between theoretical and practical knowledge. Theoretical knowledge involves the accurate compilation and assessment of factual and systematic relationships. Practical knowledge consists of skills needed to do things like play the piano, use a band saw, remove a tumor, or bake a cake. • Relativism is the belief that knowledge is determined by specific qualities of the observer. In other words, absolute (universal) knowledge of the truth is impossible; “one opinion is as good as another.” • Willed ignorance is indifference to the possibility of one’s error or one’s enlightenment; people with this attitude hold on to beliefs regardless of the facts.
REFLECTIONS
1. How would you explain what philosophy is to
someone who did not already know? 2. Identify the primary areas of philosophy and give an example of the kinds of questions covered in each. 3. What is an archetype? How does it differ from a stereotype? Give examples of each.
4. What are the advantages of studying philosophical archetypes? 5. Make the case that our culture is suffering from a kind of philosophical illiteracy. Don’t be overly general. Cite examples and identify patterns. 6. Why study philosophy?
philosophy and the search for wisdom 7. What is wisdom? Explain how it is related to knowledge. 8. Analyze your own education to this point. In what ways has it hindered, and in what ways has it supported, your love of wisdom?
■
15
10. To what extent do you think gender and ethnic background should be considered in evaluating an individual’s beliefs? Do gender, ethnic background, and other factors (age, income, and so on) control what we think?
9. If you could make only one improvement in the American educational system, what would it be and why?
PHILOSOPHY INTERNET RESOURCES Go to the Soccio Web page at the Wadsworth Philosophy Shoppe Website http://philosophy.wadsworth.com/Soccio6e for Web links and InfoTrac College Edition search terms related to this chapter, practice quizzes and tests, a pronunciation guide, and study tips.
This page intentionally left blank
Overview of Classical Themes
Empty is the philosopher’s argument by which no human suffering is therapeutically treated. For just as there is no use in a medical art that does not cast out the sicknesses of the bodies, so too there is no use in philosophy, unless it casts out the suffering of the soul. Epicurus
There is, I assure you, a medical art for the soul. It is philosophy, whose aid need not be sought, as in bodily diseases, from outside ourselves.We must endeavor with all our strength to become capable of doctoring ourselves. Cicero
All humanity is sick. I come therefore to you as a physician who has diagnosed this universal disease and is prepared to cure it. Buddha
The unexamined life is not worth living. Socrates
18
■
overview of classical themes
Western philosophy began in ancient Greece about eight hundred years before the time of Christ. At that time, the chief component of Greek culture was a powerful religious mythology. These early myths offered primitive explanations of natural phenomena, human history, and the gods. They provided standards of conduct, morality, social obligations, education, art, religious practices, and so on. The most important mythical view of life was expressed in the Iliad and the Odyssey, two epic poems attributed to the ancient Greek poet Homer (c. eighth century B.C.E.). For the Greeks of Homer’s era, everything happened through some kind of divine agency. They believed, for example, that the sun was carried around the heavens by Apollo’s golden chariot, that thunder and lightning were hurled down from the top of Mount Olympus by Zeus, and that the motion of Poseidon’s trident created waves. Other natural phenomena were thought to have similar divine origins. The nature of the community, victory or defeat in war, the course of love, and other human affairs were also directly tied to the gods. The ancient Greek gods were exaggerated human beings: bigger, stronger, and faster. Like human beings, they were also jealous, sneaky, biased, lazy, promiscuous, and violent. They were not, however, morally or spiritually superior to humans. In fact, the gods were often indifferent to human affairs, including human suffering, because they were involved in complicated soap operas of their own. Occasionally the gods took an interest in an individual human being or involved themselves in wars or politics, often treating people as pieces in an elaborate chesslike game. Although the ancient Greeks’ mythological accounting of events ultimately failed, it implied two crucial principles that are still disputed by philosophers: 1. There is a difference between the way things appear and the way they really are. 2. There are unseen causes of events.
These principles marked a major advance beyond less analytic mythological characterizations of nature and society. Greek mythology was not sheer fantasy; it was the product of a desire to find explanations. Science grew out of this search for explanations, and philosophy grew out of attempts to provide rational justification for these early prescientific explanations. As ancient Greece developed, its social structure became less restrictive (though by no means democratic in the modern sense). Colonization of outlying cities and communities contributed to the rise of philosophy, as increased social and political freedom combined with an established culture to permit increasingly free inquiry and exchange of ideas. As Greek civilization grew, colonization led to increasing interaction with sophisticated nearby Eastern cultures and the mythological worldview became less effective. Explaining events with “the gods willed it” became less and less satisfying. Presocratic Western philosophers challenged the mythological worldview by asking for rational explanations of questions that mythology could not adequately answer: “Why doesn’t the earth fall out of the sky like an apple from a tree?”“What holds it up? And what holds that up?”“Why don’t the stars fall out of the sky?” Or, more subtly yet,“How come if I eat fish and grain, I don’t look like a fish or stalk of wheat? How does ‘fish stuff’ become fingernail ‘stuff’? Where does the stone go that is worn away by the waterfall? I cannot see it being chipped away. What is this
© National Gallery Collection. By kind permission of the Trustees of the National Gallery, London/Corbis
overview of classical themes
■
19
Homer’s Iliad had a major impact on ancient Greek culture. This powerful tale of the Trojan war intertwined the lives of humans with the whims of Olympian gods and provided a mythical ideal of the hero.
invisible ‘stuff’ that ‘goes away’?” And, again: “Where did ‘stuff’ come from? Where does it go?” (See Chapter 3 for a fuller account of this stage of philosophical development.)
Nature and Convention
In their efforts to provide unified rational explanations, these early philosophers first concentrated on the “world order,” kosmos in Greek, and “nature,” phusis or physis in Greek. You may recognize the roots of the English words cosmos and physics in these ancient Greek terms. Around the fifth century, an element of specialization emerged throughout the ancient world. Actually, the word “division” is probably more accurate than “specialization” because philosophers began to distinguish between nature (physis) and convention (nomos), rather than to specialize along narrower lines. The terms “norm,”“normative,” and “normal” derive from the Greek root nomos. In the West, humanistic philosophers known as Sophists (Chapter 4) turned away from the study of nature and toward the study of “man.” In China and Southeast Asia, humanistic sages (Chapter 2) turned away from the study of gods and spirits and toward the study of “man” and nature.
Contemporary Lessons from the Past
You’re right to wonder about the use of the word “man” here: The ancient world was socially hierarchical and chauvinistic in its divisions of people into social classes of varying status, influence, and power according to nationality, bloodlines (a crude form of “racial” thinking), gender, language and dialect, talent, and beauty. For many—but not all—classical philosophers, women were, by nature, not capable of philosophical reasoning. Of course, in this, the philosophers were not
■
overview of classical themes The Olympian god Atlas was said to support the world on his shoulders. Growing dissatisfied with such mythological accounts of natural phenomena, Presocratic philosophers sought rational explanations.
© Atlas, copy of a Greek Hellenistic original (marble) (detail), Roman/Museo Archeologico Nazionale, Naples, Italy/Bridgeman Art Library.
20
alone; they reflected the norms of their times, as did many women. The Asian sage Confucius (Chapter 2), for example, compared women to servants who were easily offended. Plato, arguably the single most influential Western philosopher, thought of women as “lesser men,” although he also allows women in the ranks of the philosopher-kings who occupy the highest strata in his ideal state (Chapter 6). Aristotle (Chapter 7), one of the most significant thinkers in the history of Western philosophy, thought of women as “mistakes” of nature—“incomplete” or “misbegotten” men. The hedonist Epicurus, on the other hand, made no philosophical distinctions between men and women (Chapter 8).
Persons and Arguments When we uncritically and rigidly apply contemporary values to past practices and ideas, we commit the fallacy of anachronism. Even though we can never be sure that our current understanding of the past is “accurate,” we can make good-faith efforts to understand the conditions that affected people’s thinking and acting. Doing so does not commit us to some form of relativism or prevent us from evaluating ideas from other times and cultures. Rather, understanding the historical context that gives rise to a philosophical point of view allows us to cull from the richness and complexity of the entire human condition. Further, we do not need to reject an entire philosophical enterprise just because we find some aspect of it unacceptable—unless what’s unaccept-
able is the heart of the enterprise or is entailed by essential components of it. Just as we do not want to uncritically impose contemporary values on ancient philosophers, neither do we want to reject a philosopher’s arguments because we object to that philosopher’s personal habits or beliefs. When we do that, we commit what is known as the ad hominem fallacy. Ad hominem is Latin for “at the man.” In this context it means “against the arguer, against the person making the argument.” (Ironically, the term ad hominem presents us with an example of the pervasiveness and ambiguity of terms based on the root “man”: “mankind,” “human,” “chairman,” “humanistic,” even “woman.”)
overview of classical themes
Some of the most important and complex questions philosophers ask today concern proper attitudes toward thinkers from the past. Chapters 10, 12, and 18 address this issue directly, and reference to it recurs throughout our philosophical journey. But at the beginning of this inquiry, let me encourage you to seek empathetic understanding before passing judgment on new ideas and those who advocate them. Practicing this principle helps avoid confusing issues and arguments with the persons who advocate them. (See the “Persons and Arguments” box on page 20.)
The Search for Excellence
One of the major themes in ancient philosophy is the search for general human excellence, or virtue. The Greek word for virtue (arete) means “excellence” and is associated with potency and functionality. The Chinese word for virtue ( jen) connotes benevolence, humanity, and being a real, authentic person. Thus, something lacking in “virtue” fails to function in some way. Without virtue, things are “dysfunctional,” incomplete, not themselves, not what they are meant to be. In the West, the philosophical search for human excellence links the Sophists (Chapter 4) to Socrates (Chapter 5), Plato (Chapter 6), Aristotle (Chapter 7), and the Stoics (Chapter 8). In Asia, the ancient sages also produced long-standing theories of virtue and well-being (Chapter 2).
The Search for Happiness
As a rule, ancient philosophers did not distinguish between “being good” and “being happy” the way many of us do today. Rather, they thought of “living the good life”as “living well,”in the sense of thriving, of being healthy or “fully human.” Today, it is common to equate “being happy” with almost any form of “personal satisfaction.” If happiness is a feeling, then I cannot be wrong about being happy: If I feel happy, I am happy. This particular view of happiness defines “being happy” in purely subjective and individualistic terms. Classical notions of happiness were more complicated. A helpful analogy here is between being healthy and feeling healthy and being happy and feeling happy. It’s easy to understand that Margaret may not be well even though Margaret feels well. In other words, Margaret can be unhealthy and feel fine. Conversely, Joe can be convinced that he is dying from cancer even though he is cancer-free. Further, unhealthy individuals can—because they are unhealthy—get used to being sick. Thus, the habitual smoker “feels good” when she poisons herself with a puff on a cigar, but “feels bad” when she acts wisely and refrains from smoking. If, however, more than subjective conditions are necessary for happiness, then the individual is not the determiner of happiness. In such a view, it is possible to think you are happy and be wrong. If that sounds crazy to you, you are not alone. But before dismissing classical notions of happiness, wait and see what sorts of reasons the ancient philosophers give for their views.
■
21
This page intentionally left blank
Lao-tzu, Confucius, and Buddha Who knows why Heaven dislikes what it dislikes? Even the sage considers it a difficult question. Lao-tzu
He who learns but does not think is lost; he who thinks but does not learn is in danger. Confucius
If you will now and at all times, whether walking, standing, sitting, or lying, only concentrate on eliminating analytic thinking, at long last you will inevitably discover the truth. Buddha
2
THE ASIAN SAGES
23 Copyright 2007 Thomson Learning, Inc. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.
sage Archetypal figure who combines religious inspiration and extraordinary insight into the human condition; the English word sage is derived from the Latin sapiens, meaning “wise.”
Tao Literally “way” or “path,” Tao (or Dao) is variously translated as the source of all existence, the principle of all things, the way or path of the universe, or the moral law; key concept in Confucian and Taoist philosophy.
yin In Ancient Chinese metaphysics, weak, negative, dark, and destructive natural “force” or principle; Earth; linked with yang.
yang In Ancient Chinese metaphysics, strong, positive, light, and constructive natural “force” or principle; Heaven; linked with yin. 24
O
ur survey of philosophical archetypes
-