[lit-ideas] Re: Logical Corpuscularism

  • From: "" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx" for DMARC)
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 21:19:37 -0400

In a message dated 9/9/2015 2:51:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jejunejesuit.geary2@xxxxxxxxx quotes a song by CHOI, WHEE SUNG, KIM, YANG WOO,
LEE,
JUN KYOUNG and JUNG, SEOK WON N.

It is meant to revindicate Popper. Popper finds himself at the crossroads
as it were. In the old days, w1 was DETERMINISTIC, while w2 was
INdeterminstic (we never know what Buridan's ass will do).

In Popper's days (he never read the classics the way Grice did?) it was w1
that was INdeterministic (what McEvoy calls the 'quantum-theoretical'
"sense" of "probability") while Popper rather stubornly wants to stick to a w2
that is, ironically, deterministic ("We don't want to say that our decisions
are not determined," or words to that effect.

And where do corpuscula fit?

Well, of course Lewis/Short have a brief entry for the singular:

corpuscŇ≠lum

a mere diminutive of "corpus", and thus, "a little body".

The interesting thing is that Lewis/Short quote from Lucrezio using
'corpuscule' ( 2, 152; 2, 530; 4, 199); so the brilliant idea cannot just be
Boyle's.

Lucrezio saw no problem in allowing a swerve of corpuscula that is totally
(as Scarlet Johansson says) consistent with free-will:

Denique si semper motu conectitur omnis
et vetere exoritur novus ordine certo
nec declinando faciunt primordia motus
principium quoddam, quod fati foedera rumpat,
ex infinito ne causam causa sequatur,
libera per terras unde haec animantibus exstat,
unde est haec, inquam, fatis avolsa voluntas,
per quam progredimur quo ducit quemque voluptas,
declinamus item motus nec tempore certo
nec regione loci certa, sed ubi ipsa tulit mens?
nam dubio procul his rebus sua cuique voluntas
principium dat et hinc motus per membra rigantur. ...
sed ne res ipsa necessum
intestinum habeat cunctis in rebus agendis
et devicta quasi cogatur ferre patique,
id facit exiguum clinamen principiorum
nec regione loci certa nec tempore certo. ...
...quod fati foedera rumpat,
ex infinito ne causam causa sequatur,
libera per terras unde haec animantibus exstat,
unde est haec, inquam, fatis avolsa voluntas,
per quam progredimur quo ducit quemque voluptas,
Dico animo nostro primum simulacra meandi
accidere atque animum pulsare, ut diximus ante.
inde voluntas fit;

Nunc qui fiat uti passus proferre queamus,
cum volumus, varieque datum sit membra movere,
et quae res tantum hoc oneris protrudere nostri
corporis insuerit, dicam ; to percipe dicta. 880

First images
strike the mind,
then comes will Dico animo nostro primum simulacra meandi
accidere atque animum pulsare, ut diximus ante.
inde voluntas fit;
neque enim facere incipit ullam
rem quisquam, quam mens providit quid velit ante;
id quod providet, illius rei constat imago.
ergo animus cum sere ita commovet ut velit ire
inque gredi, ferit extemplo quae in corpore toto
per membra atque artus animai dissita vis est
et facilest factu, quoniam coniuncta tenetur.
inde ea proporro corpus ferit, atque ita tota
paulatim moles protruditur atque movetur.
praeterea tum rarescit quoque corpus, et aer
(scilicet ut debet qui semper mobilis extat)
per patefacta vent penetratque foramina largus,
et dispargitur ad partis ita quasque minutas
corporis. hic igitur rebus fit utrimque duabus,
corpus ut, ac navis velis ventoque, feratur.
Nec tamen illud in his rebus mirabile constat,
tantula quod tantum corpus corpuscula possunt
contorquere et onus totum converters nostrum.
quippe etenim ventus subtili corpore tenvis
trudit agens magnam magno molimine navem,
et manus una regit quantovis impete euntem
atque gubernaclum contorquet quolibet unum,
multaque per trocleas et tympana ponders magno
commovet atque levi sustollit machina nisu.

Grice says that while there may be progress in building bridges (witness
the marvel of the Brooklyn Bridge), progress in philosophy is different. What
Popper, Grice implicates, needs to do is to put himself in Lucrezio's
shoes.

In that way, Popper should see that corpuscularism is totally (again as
Scarlet Johnansson puts it) consistent with freewill, and if Popper denies
that he is engaging in a mere terminological argument, when he shouldn't.

Cheers,

Speranza
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: