"If I can assign names as well as pictures to objects, the right assignment of them we may call truth, and the wrong assignment of them falsehood." ~ Socrates
How can we be sure that we are making "the right assignment?" The problem is that we often make assignments and assessments purely on the basis of what others have told us or what we have read in various news media.
We also accept the definition of, and adopt as our own, certain words, phrases, terminology, and symbols that are delivered to us by social conventions and all forms of media.
Is this prudent behavior? Just because something is widely accepted or is intelligently communicated should one, by default, accept its validity? We do it every day...
Today, I would like to share a portion of one of my favorite Socrates dialogues, where he is applying his famous "Socratic Method," as written by Plato, in Cratylus:
CRATYLUS: I think, Socrates, their function is to instruct, and this is the simple truth, that he who knows the names knows also the things named.
SOCRATES: I suppose, Cratylus, you mean that when anyone knows the nature of the name -- and its nature is that of the thing -- he will know the thing also, since it is like the name, and the science of all things which are like each other are one in the same. It is, I fancy, on this ground that you say whoever knows names will know things also.... Do you think that he who has discovered the names has discovered also the things named; or do you think inquiry and discovery demand another method, and this belongs to instruction?
CRATYLUS: I most certainly think inquiry and discovery follow this same method and in the same
SOCRATES: Let us consider the matter, Cratylus. Do you not see that he who in his inquiry after things follows names and examines into the meaning of each one runs great risks of being deceived?
CRATYLUS: How so?
SOCRATES: Clearly, he who first gave names, gave such names as agreed with his conception of the nature of things. That is our view, is it not?
CRATYLUS: Yes.
SOCRATES: Then if his conception was incorrect, and he gave the names according to his conception, what do you suppose will happen to us who follow him? Can we help being deceived?
What were you thinking about when reading this dialogue? Personally, I imagined a modern day Socrates and Cratylus strolling down the street and catching a glimpse of CNBC on a television monitor in the window of Circuit City. They stop for just a moment to watch and listen to some commentary on the economy and stock market and Cratylus asks Socrates if he thinks he should follow the "advice" of the financial media pundits. From there, Socrates delivers his dialogue...
What are your thoughts? As Socrates asked Cratylus, "Can we help being deceived?"
-------------------------------------------
Related Philosopher Pages: Socrates, Plato
Again you have come up with an outstanding post. Thank you.
Posted by: Ronald Boyd | January 29, 2009 at 12:54 PM
Thank-you, Ronald. I appreciate your kind words and you for reading.
Cheers...
Kent
Posted by: Kent @ The Financial Philosopher | January 29, 2009 at 01:54 PM
This is very fascinating read.
I may be on complete tangent but your articles always provoke some nodes, allow me to express Sir..
Nothing in life is an ultimate truth; human cycle in my two cents worth is the name of constant deception, new stuff take over old ideas.
We have to judge events from realities of present; sometime making judgments of an event outside the restraints of the time when the event happened is kind of worst deception we tend to engage in flagrantly.
On the CNBC issue in my humble opinion we are prisoner of our own limitations. We have restricted ‘truth’ by straitjacketing facts within the time frames of the market hours, the GS analyst who thought oil at 200$ is a reality may be right in 5 years but his call led to a hedge fund frenzy that destabilised the entire commodity pricing structures.
Last ‘June’ the riots in the world were based on rising prices and inflationary pressures, today we are looking at falling prices. The problem I see is that we try to interpret normal span of human life associated economic cycle within 5 hours of market frenzy trading.
Time is a function of movement. ‘Solar time’ moves slower than’ universe time’ that is based on light years. We are already on verge of shortening the slower moving solar time to restrictions of our market timings.
Crisis of confidence in ABS, CMBS and in the global financial system is a result of streak of instant gratification based on market hours, the reason that every company listed on the market exchanges look for the next quarterly earnings result onto spinning of facts and manipulation of our abilities.
Predictions of global warming, commodity shortages and deflationary 1930 turndown are all made within context of market sessions, therefore it appears that a constant ‘deception’ is going on. We are victims of our shortened time span; our normal human life span is short enough if seen in context of universe light years however the demands of the market has led to even this shortened time to be further deflated. Our ancestors just few thousand years ago would live with understanding of not days but seasons now we have grasp of nano nano seconds, what is truth in a span of 10,000 years may be false in the blink of 20 years. Similarly what is true for five market sessions is false for extended one year.
There is no ultimate truth and no ultimate false, the guys who thought we will die of shortages will be proven wrong so will be those who think oil can stay at 30$’s, in between lies a position of moderation, we have just rocked the boat of moderation, our calamities are self inflicted, in medium to long term we see our levels, the reason we have extreme of volatility in the market and like of case of LTCM break the limits of risk is demands of the markets to perform in shorter span of time.
Satyam disaster is a result of demands to perform every quarter, one quarter disaster led to snowballing of the crime, Madoff greed was based on beating the market year on year, we have raised the bar and a result truth is the first victim.
An evolutionary cycle that takes 16 billion years from big bang to become self conscious cannot meet the pressures of the further shortening of time, we can run below 9 seconds a 100 meter dash but natural evolution is at the limits of compression, the deception and spin that we see on CNBC is indication of are suffering from this compression of time. Definitely you summed it very well..
"If I can assign names as well as pictures to objects, the right assignment of them we may call truth, and the wrong assignment of them falsehood." ~ Socrates
Posted by: Iqbal Latif | January 30, 2009 at 06:54 AM
Iqbal:
I like how you doubt things. To add to our dialogue, I would say that the act of doubting actually supports the existence of truth...
"Everyone who observes himself doubting observes a truth, and about that which he observes he is certain; therefore he is certain about a truth. Everyone therefore who doubts whether truth exists has in himself a truth on which not to doubt.... Hence one who can doubt at all ought not to doubt about the existence of truth." ~ St. Augustine
Posted by: Kent @ The Financial Philosopher | January 30, 2009 at 08:47 PM