Really enjoyed this, I'm hoping to finally finish reading The Republic soon. Looking forward to more.
I'm not sure I agree with your argument tho - my understanding is that Socrates is pursuing "Truth of the Good" as an abstract form rather than propositions that everyone can agree with.
It isn't cumulative, convergent progress like in maths or science - arguably because when philosophy makes progress it spins out new fields (ie. math/logic, physics, cognitive science, decision theory, welfare economics etc). Like when something becomes rigorous enough, it becomes its own thing. Leaving philosophy with the messy leftovers.
My impression of what Socrates is trying to do is more akin to stripping away false certainty because that distracts from pursuit of an ideal. It seems to be a process of orientation within the individual - to be able "to see" more clearly.
- The Republic bangs, I think about it a lot. Especially the section you are probably on, book 8 maybe, when he describes how the perfect state becomes oligarchy, timarchy, democracy and then tyranny. Such a cool way of looking at a concept - i.e. by examining what happens when it is deconstructed.
- I like the description of Socrates as stripping away false certainty. I agree that's part of what he does, but he also, especially in the early dialogues of which Gorgias is the last, is trying to build back up to truth. It's only in the later dialogues, which scholars usually think represent the views of Plato more than historical Socrates, where we get the theory of the forms and knowledge as this ideal we aim towards. To be fair though, even in the republic, a lot of the discussion relies on the idea that you can reach truth. Philosopher Kings need to be more correct that the general person to justify their position and their study.
- 'is The Scout Mindset just notes to Plato?' Almost always.
- haha I've lost my copy ☠️ I need to find it again or just read it online like a normal person.
- On Plato, is it reaching for Truth or Good? Like you can have truth without goodness but not goodness without truth. My understanding is that The Good is at the top of Plato's hierarchy. Tbf that does flatter my intuitions that EA Forum > LessWrong.
I've just been chatting to Claude about the sun analogy to try and eek this out:
Sun = the Form of the Good
Light = Truth / intelligibility
Things seen = the other Forms
Eyes = us, the knowers
- I've been thinking about Plato's world of forms Vs Buddhist thought. My understanding is that Buddhism aims to accept the emptiness and stop grasping. There's a lot of crossover in the discipline and ideas about how to live. But I'm unsatisfied by this as an answer - it's truth without the good. I think I just believe in good as a concept.
If you've read Moral Ambition, that opening story about the monk in the brain scan who had the happiest brain they'd ever seen? I think I just agree that getting to the bottom of reality and our consciousness is not enough.
Enough against what? The good.
Maybe the thing I like about EA is that it refines my taste in the good. Lol I've got a barely written draft titled Ratatouill-EA that describes EA as an art criticism movement. Like I sometimes feel like Anton Ego when I'm trying to explain EA to friends like:
"I don't like food/good, I LOVE it. If I don't love it, I don't swallow/donate"
The critic speech at the end can totally be read as a defence of weird cause areas.
Have you read any Iris Murdoch? The sovereignty of good over other concepts slaps and is written in a mood of being very excited about Plato's concept of the good. And yes in later Plato truth is subordinated to the good, but it's still one of the highest concepts - truth, justice and beauty are top three. And please write ratatouill-EA I need to see that.
The faith is precisely where I get off. I find Murdoch moving, and I can inhabit that frame, but ultimately it's not compelling because I still have no reason to believe in The Good. I have too much of a materialist/scientistic worldview to stomach it.
"No reason to believe in The Good" yet you act anyway. You can make claims like "this is not Just, not True, not Beautiful, not Good."
Maybe it's easier to experience the negation - injustice, falsehood and ugliness? That's why it feels so magic when you see progress.
Have you read much Camus? Absurd is such a fantastic way of describing material creatures that grand opinions about truth, justice, beauty and the good in a meaningless universe.
Hahah I finished Sovereignty of the Good about 2 weeks ago. Inspired me to attempt Plato again.
Experiences over reasons does just seem like a better explanation for behaviour change. I'd actually heard most of the EA arguments - drowning child, strong cases for veganism etc - before EA but I never took action.
I remember having such a visceral reaction to the web version of the 80k career guide - I ended up cancelling my plans for the evening to stay in and read it all. An aesthetic experience akin to Murdoch's kestrel example.
I have great admiration for people who took action on the ideas alone but it was interacting with the community that was most important. Seeing people model the behaviour in person was just super important.
My understanding is community of practice and how to habituate the good is more Aristotle's territory. I've read none of his stuff yet.
"Experiences over reasons does just seem like a better explanation for behaviour change" I agree! I wrote about that ages ago (https://substack.com/@raisingdust/p-68416691). TLDR no one is convinced by singer's arguments for vegetarianism, they are swayed more by the aesthetic.
Really enjoyed this, I'm hoping to finally finish reading The Republic soon. Looking forward to more.
I'm not sure I agree with your argument tho - my understanding is that Socrates is pursuing "Truth of the Good" as an abstract form rather than propositions that everyone can agree with.
It isn't cumulative, convergent progress like in maths or science - arguably because when philosophy makes progress it spins out new fields (ie. math/logic, physics, cognitive science, decision theory, welfare economics etc). Like when something becomes rigorous enough, it becomes its own thing. Leaving philosophy with the messy leftovers.
My impression of what Socrates is trying to do is more akin to stripping away false certainty because that distracts from pursuit of an ideal. It seems to be a process of orientation within the individual - to be able "to see" more clearly.
Damn - is The Scout Mindset just notes to Plato?
- The Republic bangs, I think about it a lot. Especially the section you are probably on, book 8 maybe, when he describes how the perfect state becomes oligarchy, timarchy, democracy and then tyranny. Such a cool way of looking at a concept - i.e. by examining what happens when it is deconstructed.
- I like the description of Socrates as stripping away false certainty. I agree that's part of what he does, but he also, especially in the early dialogues of which Gorgias is the last, is trying to build back up to truth. It's only in the later dialogues, which scholars usually think represent the views of Plato more than historical Socrates, where we get the theory of the forms and knowledge as this ideal we aim towards. To be fair though, even in the republic, a lot of the discussion relies on the idea that you can reach truth. Philosopher Kings need to be more correct that the general person to justify their position and their study.
- 'is The Scout Mindset just notes to Plato?' Almost always.
- haha I've lost my copy ☠️ I need to find it again or just read it online like a normal person.
- On Plato, is it reaching for Truth or Good? Like you can have truth without goodness but not goodness without truth. My understanding is that The Good is at the top of Plato's hierarchy. Tbf that does flatter my intuitions that EA Forum > LessWrong.
I've just been chatting to Claude about the sun analogy to try and eek this out:
Sun = the Form of the Good
Light = Truth / intelligibility
Things seen = the other Forms
Eyes = us, the knowers
- I've been thinking about Plato's world of forms Vs Buddhist thought. My understanding is that Buddhism aims to accept the emptiness and stop grasping. There's a lot of crossover in the discipline and ideas about how to live. But I'm unsatisfied by this as an answer - it's truth without the good. I think I just believe in good as a concept.
If you've read Moral Ambition, that opening story about the monk in the brain scan who had the happiest brain they'd ever seen? I think I just agree that getting to the bottom of reality and our consciousness is not enough.
Enough against what? The good.
Maybe the thing I like about EA is that it refines my taste in the good. Lol I've got a barely written draft titled Ratatouill-EA that describes EA as an art criticism movement. Like I sometimes feel like Anton Ego when I'm trying to explain EA to friends like:
"I don't like food/good, I LOVE it. If I don't love it, I don't swallow/donate"
The critic speech at the end can totally be read as a defence of weird cause areas.
Have you read any Iris Murdoch? The sovereignty of good over other concepts slaps and is written in a mood of being very excited about Plato's concept of the good. And yes in later Plato truth is subordinated to the good, but it's still one of the highest concepts - truth, justice and beauty are top three. And please write ratatouill-EA I need to see that.
Lol that's what a comment from my phone looks like. Still getting used to this app.
What do you think?
Plato does seem to evolve into a kind of faith. Does it move you?
The faith is precisely where I get off. I find Murdoch moving, and I can inhabit that frame, but ultimately it's not compelling because I still have no reason to believe in The Good. I have too much of a materialist/scientistic worldview to stomach it.
Maybe faith is too positive a frame.
"No reason to believe in The Good" yet you act anyway. You can make claims like "this is not Just, not True, not Beautiful, not Good."
Maybe it's easier to experience the negation - injustice, falsehood and ugliness? That's why it feels so magic when you see progress.
Have you read much Camus? Absurd is such a fantastic way of describing material creatures that grand opinions about truth, justice, beauty and the good in a meaningless universe.
Really interesting thread about L'étranger: https://x.com/PAHoyeck/status/2053477498516554159?s=20
Hahah I finished Sovereignty of the Good about 2 weeks ago. Inspired me to attempt Plato again.
Experiences over reasons does just seem like a better explanation for behaviour change. I'd actually heard most of the EA arguments - drowning child, strong cases for veganism etc - before EA but I never took action.
I remember having such a visceral reaction to the web version of the 80k career guide - I ended up cancelling my plans for the evening to stay in and read it all. An aesthetic experience akin to Murdoch's kestrel example.
I have great admiration for people who took action on the ideas alone but it was interacting with the community that was most important. Seeing people model the behaviour in person was just super important.
My understanding is community of practice and how to habituate the good is more Aristotle's territory. I've read none of his stuff yet.
"Experiences over reasons does just seem like a better explanation for behaviour change" I agree! I wrote about that ages ago (https://substack.com/@raisingdust/p-68416691). TLDR no one is convinced by singer's arguments for vegetarianism, they are swayed more by the aesthetic.
Oh ofc!! Yes very accurate to my view
This is such a good comment, thank you!! I want to reply properly so I won't dash out a quick answer during work. I'll get back to you later.