The Cerebral Catalyst

That Plato posited a Good (with it, Justice) that could never be proven and established a priesthood (Philosopher-Kings) to administer policy (what's good now) is not so impossible to imagine.

Thrasymachus, famous for having been upped by Socrates in the discussion, gives us justice as what’s stronger, not what’s good (“good,” among other definitions, being what’s common), and this position is what Plato actually establishes for his Philosopher-Kings in The Republic, the position of the stronger, which is what he obviously denies but fundamentally affirms.

The noble lie: 1, 2, 3. The necessary lie.

Does contradiction destruct an argument? (Deconstruction.) Or is the contradiction merely the epistemological un-grounding of the ground itself, the point at which all constructions must announce themselves as such? And does such an announcement follow Russell’s Paradox, Escher’s Multiple Vanishing Points, and Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem?

What shadow does philosophy wear, i.e., what is its directedness? Which would lead one to the conclusion that’s what’s fundamental is contradiction, the un-announcement of what’s absent. Or another direction.

Social contradiction: M.

______________________________________
posted 12.18.06.

Emergent Properties:

Main

F.A.Q.

About

Archives (alphabetical)
Archives (chronological)

Links - Updated 05.05.08

Books - Updated 05.05.08

Pandemic Poetry

Taglines

Site founded May 7th, 2003, by Project Catalyst.
All written material is the copyrighted property of its respective authors.
All other elements can be blamed on the Cerebral Catalyst Editorial Board.