Log24

Saturday, April 8, 2017

A Perfect Nonentity

Filed under: General,Geometry — Tags: , , , — m759 @ 8:25 am

The title is from Hume:

 "And were all my perceptions removed by death,
and could I neither think, nor feel, nor see, nor love,
nor hate, after the dissolution of my body, I should
be entirely annihilated, nor do I conceive what is
further requisite to make me a perfect nonentity."

— Book I, Part IV, Section vi  of  
    A Treatise of Human Nature

"What is further requisite" — Perhaps  

This four-dot notation ("as") is from a search for Lévi-Strauss in this journal.

See also "That I Am."

Saturday, May 5, 2018

Hume, Parfit. Parfit, Hume.

Filed under: General — Tags: — m759 @ 7:11 pm

 "And were all my perceptions removed by death,
and could I neither think, nor feel, nor see, nor love,
nor hate, after the dissolution of my body, I should
be entirely annihilated, nor do I conceive what is
further requisite to make me a perfect nonentity."

— Book I, Part IV, Section vi  of  
    A Treatise of Human Nature

— Detail from the ending of Philip Pullman's
     graphic novel "Mystery of the Ghost Ship"

Saturday, August 12, 2017

Images from 1984

Filed under: General — Tags: — m759 @ 9:00 am

For the author of a Harvard Crimson  opinion piece yesterday on 1984 ,
two images adapted from a 1984 film —

Mola Ram from 'Temple of Doom'

See also, in this  journal, Hume's phrase "perfect nonentity."

Friday, April 7, 2017

Personal Identity

Filed under: General,Geometry — Tags: , — m759 @ 2:40 pm

From "The Most Notorious Section Phrases," by Sophie G. Garrett
in The Harvard Crimson  on April 5, 2017 —

This passage reminds me of (insert impressive philosophy
that was not in the reading).

This student is just being a show off. We get that they are smart
and well read. Congrats, but please don’t make the rest of the us
look bad in comparison. It should be enough to do the assigned
reading without making connections to Hume’s theory of the self.

Hume on personal identity (the "self")

For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. I never can catch myself at any time without a perception, and never can observe any thing but the perception. When my perceptions are removed for any time, as by sound sleep, so long am I insensible of myself, and may truly be said not to exist. And were all my perceptions removed by death, and could I neither think, nor feel, nor see, nor love, nor hate, after the dissolution of my body, I should be entirely annihilated, nor do I conceive what is further requisite to make me a perfect nonentity.
. . . .

I may venture to affirm of the rest of mankind, that they are nothing but a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeed each other with an inconceivable rapidity, and are in a perpetual flux and movement. Our eyes cannot turn in their sockets without varying our perceptions. Our thought is still more variable than our sight; and all our other senses and faculties contribute to this change: nor is there any single power of the soul, which remains unalterably the same, perhaps for one moment. The mind is a kind of theatre, where several perceptions successively make their appearance; pass, repass, glide away, and mingle in an infinite variety of postures and situations. There is properly no simplicity in it at one time, nor identity in different, whatever natural propension we may have to imagine that simplicity and identity. The comparison of the theatre must not mislead us. They are the successive perceptions only, that constitute the mind; nor have we the most distant notion of the place where these scenes are represented, or of the materials of which it is composed.

Related material —
Imago Dei  in this journal.

The Ring of the Diamond Theorem

Backstory —
The previous post
and The Crimson Abyss.

Powered by WordPress