The Grand Logician — Bertrand Russell Speaks


The following concerns the tendency of an otherwise useful word’s meaning to be semantically hijacked when neglected, in this case, a word often used by believers as a catch-all justification for their claims, and a form of ‘evidence’ often subject to misconstrual as unerring in it’s accuracy, unaware of the many ways it may mislead us if we are without care in assessing what it tells us.

In the revolt against idealism, the ambiguities of the word “experience” have been perceived, with the result that realists have more and more avoided the word. It is to be feared, however, that if the word is avoided the confusions of thought with which it has been associated may persist.

Russell and I would probably get along splendidly seeing that his views of science, despite the failure of the Unity of Science program, very much match my own in some important respects. Then again, the Logical Positivists, though ultimately unsuccessful, did provide some very important ground rules for modern science, and that’s something to bear in mind.

It seems to me that science has a much greater likelihood of being true in the main than any philosophy hitherto advanced (I do not, of course, except my own). In science there are many matters about which people are agreed; in philosophy there are none. Therefore, although each proposition in a science may be false, and it is practically certain that there are some that are false, yet we shall be wise to build our philosophy upon science, because the risk of error in philosophy is pretty sure to be greater than in science. If we could hope for certainty in philosophy, the matter would be otherwise, but so far as I can see such a hope would be chimerical.

This last deals with a common theme (trope?) on this blog, the eternal struggle waged by those who wish reality to support their presuppositions, rather than to base their suppositions on reality, very much putting ‘Descartes before de horse…’

We all have a tendency to think that the world must conform to our prejudices. The opposite view involves some effort of thought, and most people would die sooner than think — in fact they do so.

Bertrand Arthur William Russell, 3rd Earl Russell (1872-05-18 – 1970-02-02) was a British mathematician, philosopher and logician.

About Troy Loy

I seek to learn through this site and others how to better my ability as a person and my skill at using my reason and understanding to best effect. I do fractal artwork as a hobby, and I'm working to develop it to professional levels, though I've a bit to go till I reach that degree of skill! This is a crazy world we're in, but maybe I can do a little, if only that, to make it a bit more sane than it otherwise would be.

Posted on Friday, 0:09, December 2, 2011, in Quotes & the Quotable and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 3 Comments.

  1. I have enjoyed reading Russell’s books and pamphlets over the past more than fifty years and have agreed with some of his positions, disagreed with others. Agree or disagree, his use of the English language, if widely emulated, would greatly improve discourse.

    Like

  1. Pingback: Bertrand Arthur William Russell Quiz - 3rd Earl Russell - British Pphilosopher - Nobel Prize in Literature

  2. Pingback: Enlightened self-interest and international relations | danmillerinpanama

Commenting below. No spam or trolling, or my cats will be angry.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,060 other followers

%d bloggers like this: