School of Economic Science
ta panta (the many) as the partial, to study, to investigate

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    School of Economic Science - Study Forums Forum Index -> Plato Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
redundant fallibility
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 3:17 am    Post subject: ta panta (the many) as the partial, to study, to investigate Reply with quote

ta panta (the many) as the partial, to study, to investigate the hen as the holistic



Ultimate presupposition: Is there a problem sitting there waiting to be solved, or is there no problem sitting there, waiting to be solved? “Waiting to be solved”, a transfer epithet? Presupposition?—Whereby does a question, alternating between two alternatives, collect to itself the name presupposition? Why do we want to name this matter, that of the question, is there a problem sitting there, waiting to be solved, or is there no problem there, waiting to be solved?, presupposition? A presupposition, an assumption, a hastening to take hold of what is close by, of what is there already in its clarity, and yet questionable. And yet subject to reflection. Only in that we reflect do we come to the name, and the name, having unlocked its object, is what we question.

Let the matter stand for the moment. What does the question ask? It asks about knowledge, is there knowledge, or, is there no knowledge? Again, it asks about intelligibility, is there intelligibility, or is there no intelligibility? This latter paraphrase, seems itself to be all but unintelligible. How could there be, even now, as we read these words, no intelligibility? Does this intelligibility hold long enough to pronounce a sentence, and then give out? Has something partially been grasped, but not the whole? One sentence, this one, but not the entire essay? The essay might be flawed, it might have been put down quite stupidly, and not hold together. Then, it is intelligible that a part, a sentence, can be understood, while the whole, which depends on the things being properly put together, might be nonsensical.

Why does the partial lead to the demand for the holistic? Is it I who drive my wits to the matter of knowledge or does this which is waiting-to-be-solved in some way attract me? Is the attraction seated in the groin, in the stomach, in the heart or in the head? Whence was it decided that what attracts must call out and then connect to what hears? But, what we know of those things that attract, from our partial knowledge of what is close by, is that they call in distinctive ways. Is intelligibility, then, such a great thing that it is not like the things that call forth, each in their own peculiar manner? Is knowledge supposed to be some kind of generic for this or that partial understanding? If there were no intelligibility, and so no knowledge, would we lose, utterly, the interpretation of things, and stand with vague eyes before everything? Would this be a questioning? But then it is impossible to understand how the questioner would reflect and get to the word questioning.

Questioning is not at all like that! It is not some falling into a chasm. Rather in questioning we question what we already intuit with the most clarity. What is nearby is easily understood. If I don’t know what something is I soon ask, what is that thing, and what is it for, and how does one use it? And then I am soon made to understand and at once I am done with that, only reflecting that I a have learned a bit, as one goes on doing every day. If only, again, tomorrow, I might be so productive. But wouldn’t questioning be something horrible, and useless, and even indefensible from an ordinary sense of what is appropriate? Because this questioning would not be a learning more in a productive manner, about the partial bits that I come across every day.

Questioning is not a mere othering of the problem of the philosopher, namely that of the intelligibility of the whole, rather it depends on the growing through the problem of the intelligibility of the whole, which brings it to arrive at the closeness of what is partial and nearby as the sight of the work of thinking. And this thinking notes the basis of what is most clear in its understanding as what it can not keep to. What is peculiar is the admixture of intelligibility in the things that are close and unusual stupefaction with respect to what is distant. The situation herein situated can be serious if and only if it is necessary, presumably by the force of historical facticity, and not a theoretical construct which might have been available at ‘any old time’.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    School of Economic Science - Study Forums Forum Index -> Plato Forum All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
This forum is sponsored by the School of Economic Science for use by its members; members of its branches; members
of affiliated schools worldwide and by all other Internet users interested in the study subjects presented.
Powered by phpBB Copyright © FSES, 2007. All Rights Reserved