Showing posts with label logos. Show all posts
Showing posts with label logos. Show all posts

14 Jan 2009

Myth and Critique in Martin Moors' Mythos and Logos course


summarization of Moors' ideas, by Corry Shores
[Search Blog Here. Index-tags are found on the bottom of the left column.]

[Central Entry Directory]

[Martin Moors's From Mythos to Logos - From Logos to Mythos course, Entry Directory]

[The following is based on student notes. My commentary is in brackets.]

Philosophers use rational discourse, which has its own logic or logos. The proper application of this discursive logic is critique. For philosophers to understand this logos, they look to its origin. Before this discursive logic developed into a critical method, it took-on a proto-critical or pre-critical form.

[The fundamental principle to all things in the cosmos is water, argues Thales. He is considered the first philosopher because he breaks from a tradition of mythological explanations for the cosmos, and instead tries to use rationality to devise a de-mythologized theoretical account of reality. And yet, compared to our current sophisticated scientific views of the cosmos, Thales' theory seems mythological. From Thales on,]

philosophy will be a gradual process of demythologization.

[When we tell a story, we give an account. There is some conclusion. Before the conclusion, there is a series of events that explain how and why that conclusion came to be what it is.

When we explain something using rational argumentation, we also give an account. We have some conclusion. Prior to that conclusion are premises whose logical relations necessitate the conclusion.

The myth of the fall from paradise explains human suffering. There were events leading up to it, that explain why the story concludes the way it does, and that also account for some aspect of human existence, namely, suffering.

If our only criteria for such an explanation is whether or not it gives an account for something, then the story of the fall is perfectly adequate.

But if we begin to wonder what makes one myth better than another, or what would be a better explanation than any given myth, then we are thinking critically.

This sort of critical origin for logos begins with Thales, who proposes that everything is fundamentally made-up of water.

And, he gives a rational account that is slightly mythologized.

According to Aristotle, Thales reasoning was that things emerge from something else which is prior to them. This origin is their principle. Whatever all things spring-from is the first principle of everything.

All living beings are nourished by water, so all life springs from water. Also, moisture produces heat, and heat persists in moisture. Moreover, the beginnings of all living beings are of a moist nature.

Also, Thales reasons that whatever the gods swear-by must be what is most highly esteemed. According to poets telling the stories of the original people, the god's swore by the river Styx. So what is most highly esteemed in the cosmos is water.

For all these reasons, Thales felt it was rationally justified, and in keeping with mythology, that he conclude that the fundamental principle of everything is water.

Because Thales proposition was based on his reasoning, it was critical of the non-rational mythical explanations of the cosmos, and as well, it was open to critique by other philosophers.]



[Taken from the first lecture of Professor Martin Moors Philosophy of Being 2008 course: "From Mythos to Logos - From Logos to Mythos," at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. Professor Moors is not just a remarkably gifted instructor, he is as well a renowned metaphysician and Kant scholar. His publication list is available here.

The ideas I here present are not my property, but belong to Prof. Moors. A suggested citation:

Moors, Martin. "From Mythos to Logos - From Logos to Mythos: Class 1." Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium. 25-Sept-2008.

]


11 Jan 2009

Logos in Martin Moors' Mythos and Logos course


summarization of Moors' ideas, by Corry Shores

[Search Blog Here. Index-tags are found on the bottom of the left column.]

[Central Entry Directory]

[Martin Moors's From Mythos to Logos - From Logos to Mythos course, Entry Directory]


[Metaphysicians discuss and explain reality through linguistically-expressed conceptions. There is a certain logic to this explanatory discourse, namely, a discursive logic. For example, contradictions are not permitted (unless paradox is for some reason to be permitted.) This logic is used to describe reality according to various theoretical systems. Hence]

Logos is the power of redescribing reality in rational discourse.

[Also, metaphysicians are not just concerned with reality. They are also concerned with their means of discussing reality. In other words, metaphysicians are interesting in understanding that very logic they use when discussing reality. But what grounds this logic must be something higher than that logic. It must transcend it. So metaphysicians use their explanatory logic to understand that very same logic. In this way,]

Logos is the search for an understanding of understanding.

[This way, metaphysicians become aware of the way they think. That is to say, they develop a consciousness of the way they think. Thus logos is this sort of higher consciousness. Hence]

Logos is consciousness of consciousness. It seeks what is most logically prior, the 'a priority.'

[An element of the discursive logic that metaphysicians use is criticism, namely, self-criticism, which allows metaphysicians to see shortcomings in their methodological logic so to improve it. Hence,]

Logos is the internal criticism that establishes its own organic self-renewal.

In this way, Kant's Critique of Pure Reason is a rational critique on reason. [We may use our rational faculties to judge our manner of reasoning. And when we judge our rational faculties using our reason, we do not do so from an anti-rational perspective.] However, Dostoyevsky and Nietzsche, for example, give a genuine critique of pure reason, because they examine rationality critically from a non-rational point-of-view. [But when we use our rational faculties to criticize our manners of reasoning, we look at rationality from a rational critical standpoint.]


[Taken from the first lecture of Professor Martin Moors Philosophy of Being 2008 course: From Mythos to Logos - From Logos to Mythos," at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. Professor Moors is not just a remarkably gifted instructor, he is as well a renowned metaphysician and Kant scholar. His publication list is available here.

The ideas I here present are not my property, but belong to Prof. Moors. A suggested citation:

Moors, Martin. "From Mythos to Logos - From Logos to Mythos: Class 1." Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium. 25-Sept-2008.

]