Pstotto wrote:The Folly of Perspectivism.jpg
Nietzsche was an imbecile, but a clever one. He built a nihilist philosophy around perspectivism, arguing that because one could not see the world from anything other than a partial viewpoint, therefore truth does not exist.
I'm beginning to think that these elites sprouting opinion for the plebs to consume, are spinning a lie as a red herring to keep folk guessing whilst they are shafted by the elite.
Wittgenstein's Tractatus, is the ultimate text of gobbledygook for fools to enthuse and be in thrall to, via his Mobius loop aphorisms.
The same with dialectics around which our Parliament is arranged and for the same purpose.
According to dialectics and thesis/antithesis = synthesis, then what the two fools in the illustration are looking at, is 7 1/2. That would be their agreement, the compromise so to speak.
The government are now putting forward '7 1/2' on the table as the Brexit deal and the public (if ithere is a second referendum,) would be asked on whether to vote for 7 1/2 or not (as the common agreement), thus shafting the populace and attempting to pull the wool over their eyes for one more time.
The idea is that you can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time.
The extensions of that, is that now with the Internet they can fool all of the people some of the time...all of the time.
So the resolution to their problem would not be 7 1/2. The thesis is followed by its negation, the antithesis, and this results in a synthesis where the apparent contradiction is smoothed out. This is a process, not a one time event. This is how I think Socrates, who pioneered the method, would have handled it:
Mr. A: 'I see six'
Ms. B: 'I do not see six'
Mr. A: 'One of us sees sixs but the other does not, how can this be true?'
Ms. B: 'Because I see nine'
Mr. A:'I do not see nine'
Ms. B: 'Then one of us sees nine and the other does not, and one of us sees six and the other does not, how can this be true?'
Mr. A:'This can only be true if the number we are looking at it is both six and nine'
The discussion would then proceed, in this manner, to the truth of the matter: that each was looking at the same number, but from a different perspective. Nietzsche's claim would, perhaps, be that, in reality, it is impossible for us ever to get past our own perspective of the number: if you think it's a six, you can't conceive that it's a nine; if you think it's a nine vice versa. Such a view precludes any objectivity - the 'view from nowhere' which tells us how things really are.
As for Wittgenstein: at least in his early period, I do not think he and Nietzsche would be comfortable bedfellows. The
Tractatus is very much on the side of there being objective truths, but Wittgenstein believed that, unlike the sciences, speculative philosophy is incapable of finding them. Instead philosophical problems arise from a poor logical analysis of natural language. Nietzsche, on the other hand, thought that even the value we place in the tools of reason themselves - logic, mathematics - is determined by our particular perspective and so even they cannot guarantee we have arrived at the 'correct' answer.
None of this has anything to do with Brexit mind.
