BROADCASTS.com

Link: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demands-for-rigor/

\xa0

I.

From\xa0Identity, Personal Identity, and the Self\xa0by John Perry:

\u201cThere is something about practical things that knocks us off our philosophical high horses. Perhaps Heraclitus really thought he couldn\u2019t step in the same river twice. Perhaps he even received tenure for that contribution to philosophy. But suppose some other ancient had claimed to have as much right as Heraclitus did to an ox Heraclitus had bought, on the grounds that since the animal had changed, it wasn\u2019t the same one he had bought and so was up for grabs. Heraclitus would have quickly come up with some ersatz, watered-down version of identity of practical value for dealing with property rights, oxen, lyres, vineyards, and the like. And then he might have wondered if that watered-down vulgar sense of identity might be a considerably more valuable concept than a pure and philosophical sort of identity that nothing has.

Okay, but I can think of something worse than that.

Imagine Heraclitus as a cattle rustler in the Old West. Every time a rancher catches him at his nefarious business, he patiently explains to them that identity doesn\u2019t exist, and therefore the same argument against private property as made above. Flummoxed, they\u2019re unable to think of a response before he rides off into the sunset.

But then when Heraclitus\xa0himself\xa0needs the concept of stable personal identity for something \u2013 maybe he wants to deposit his ill-gotten gains in the bank with certainty that the banker will give it back to him next time he shows up to withdraw it, or maybe he wants to bribe the sheriff to ignore his activities for the next while \u2013 all of a sudden Heraclitus is willing to tolerate the watered-down vulgar sense of identity like everyone else.

(actually, I can think of something even worse than\xa0that, which is a TV western based on this premise, where a roving band of pre-Socratic desperadoes terrorizes Texas. The climax is no doubt when the hero strides onto Main Street, revolver in hand, saying \u201cThere\u2019s a new sheriff in town.\u201d And Parmenides gruffly responds \u201cNo, I\u2019m pretty sure that\u2019s impossible.\u201d)

At its best, philosophy is a revolutionary pursuit that dissolves our common-sense intuitions and exposes the possibility of much deeper structures behind them. One can respond by becoming a saint or madman, or by becoming a pragmatist who is willing to continue to participate in human society while also understanding its theoretical limitations. Both are respectable career paths.

The problem is when someone chooses to apply philosophical rigor\xa0selectively.

Heraclitus could drown in his deeper understanding of personal identity and become a holy madman, eschewing material things and taking no care for the morrow because he does not believe there is any consistent self to experience it. Or he could engage with it from afar, becoming a wise scholar who participating in earthly affairs while drawing equanimity from the realization that there is a sense in which all his accomplishments will be impermanent.

But if he only applies his new theory when he wants other people\u2019s cows,\xa0then\xa0we have a problem. Philosophical rigor, usually a virtue, has been debased to an\xa0isolated demand for rigor\xa0in cases where it benefits Heraclitus.