Skip to main content

A Fragment from Xenophanes

xenophanes

Xenophanes, one of the pre-Socratic philosophers, observed,

"Ethiopians say that their gods are snub nosed and black; Thracians that theirs are blue-eyed and red-haired.

"But if cattle or lions had hands, so as to paint with their hands and produce works of art as men do, they would paint their gods and give them bodies in form like their own -- horses like horses, cattle like cattle."

What was he trying to do via these assertions? We don't know much about the context. But they are intriguing.

Was he trying to suggest that the truth about the gods is unknowable? This could be akin to Kant's antinomies. Kant told us that it is possible to prove, for example, both that the universe must have had a beginning and that the universe could not have a beginning. Thus, we can only conclude that the ultimate reality is unknown to us.

Perhaps Xenophanes was saying likewise, and we should simply read "the gods" as "noumena."


Labels:

Comments

  1. HenryJune 12, 2018 at 5:20 PM

    Based solely on the quotation, it seems obvious to me that Xenophanes was saying that people create their gods in their own image. I agree, but, even if I believed that a god or gods created us rather than vice versa, I do not see how Xenophanes' statement says anything about whether gods are knowable. I suppose that, by your final comment, you mean that, even if we don't create our gods, we see them in our own image and not as they really are. But even one who believes in a god or gods must acknowledge that we don't see them at all. If gods really exist and we don't create them in our own image, we at least create their images in our own image.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ChristopherJune 15, 2018 at 4:42 AM

    There was probably a time when humans speculating about the mind imagined an abacus inside our heads. There was certainly a time when humans speculating about the mind imagined a telephone exchange inside our head, with incoming signals from sense organs more-or-less quickly transferred into outgoing signals to the muscles (you and I are old enough to remember such analogies). Then computers became the analog of choice for what was going on inside our head. Even more recently, the dominant metaphor seems to be a culinary one, where the brain is a "soup" of chemicals, and the task of neurological pharmacology is to get the balance just right. "Yum, brain balance." In this case, as in Xenophanes', the quick resort to and the range of metaphors is an acknowledgement of ignorance.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti
7 comments
Read more

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers
Post a Comment
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak
13 comments
Read more