Dear Tom,
Good to hear from you! Your wrote:
Specifically, in what sense are "the good and the beautiful ... more
fundamental" than truth? How could something be good or beautiful
without it first being true that it is good or beautiful? And looking
at the quote you provided:
"Esthetics is the science of ideals, or of that which is objectively
admirable without and ulterior reasons. I am not well acquainted with
this science; but it ought to repose on phenomenlogy. Ethics or the
science of right and wrong, must appeal to Esthetics for aid in deter-
mining the *summum bonum*. It is the theory of self controlled, or
deliberate conduct. Logic is the theory of self controlled, or deli-
berate thought; and as such , must appeal to ethics for its
principles".
it seems to me that truth can be looked at in terms of being an ideal, as
being something that "is objectively admirable without ulterior reasons";
and that truth can also be looked at in terms of an ulterior reason, i.e.,
separating right from wrong and the benefits that accrue from doing so.
Anyway, there is a sense in which esthetics and ethics as perspectives
are fundamental; and that ideals - such as good, beautiful, true - are
more fundamental than ethical considerations (what I take Peirce to be
saying); but, I think I would balk at saying the good or the beautiful
is more fundamental than truth.
Response: You may well be right, but here's a bit more of my rationale for
the interpretation I offered. I take the beautiful to be that which we find
naturally desireable as an end in itself. What we desire as an end in
itself I define (I think along with Peirce) as an esthetic ideal or
beautiful. And yes I would agree that on this account there is beauty in
truth. But truth is at least also fundamentally a means to an end as for
example in the expression "the truth shall set you free". Indeed the truth
is a great advantage in most and perhaps all situations. The truth, I am
contending, is both beautiful and the universal means to an end. In so far
as truth is an end in itself (as it is for so many who inquire after it) the
truth is beautiful. In so far as the truth is in part the universal means
to all ends I would place truth as dependent upon beauty. Ends (as genuine
ends in themselves) are not only beautiful but are also the sin quo non of
all means.
BTW, though it's not central to the point above, I want to say that not all
seeming ends are in fact genuine ends. Often the ugliness we call ends are
not genuine ends but substitutes for the genuinely beautiful ends we can not
achieve. The mistake I've made so often in my life is to settle for
immediate gratification provided by the superficially beautiful rather than
putting forth the genuine self control of thought and and behavior required
to achieve the more enduring satisfaction of the genuinely beautiful. The
best things in life are free and available for the taking by all, but they
don't come easy. I'm taking this occassion to remind myself before I repeat
my old errors.
But Tom, all of the above notwithstanding, I've little quarrel with your
formulation. The truth is as beautiful as it is useful. And because it is
both maybe it is as you suggest about as fundamental as can be. Ah, in
fact it just now occurs to me that perhaps my choice of the word fundamental
is partly the source of our difference. I suppose the truth can appeal to
esthetics without beauty being more fundamental than truth. Also it may be
that by truth you mean something akin to "that which is" whereas I am
thinking of truth also as a representation that conforms to that which is.
IOWs not as a property of objects but as a property of representations.
So, as I use the term true, for something to be inherently desireable or
beautiful (or anything else) does not require that it "also" be truly
represented as such. But I sometimes use truth in both ways. Plus I'm the
fellow that doesn't know the true from the real so I've got plenty of room
to be confused and just plain wrong.
Thanks again for your comments.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
