UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Rhetoric and the law Aldridge, James Robert 1979

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1979_A64 A44.pdf [ 5.91MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0077639.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0077639-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0077639-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0077639-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0077639-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0077639-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0077639-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0077639-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0077639.ris

Full Text

RHETORIC AND THE LAW  by  JAMES ROBERT ALDRIDGE B.A., Brock U n i v e r s i t y , L.L.B., Y o r k U n i v e r s i t y ,  1972-75 1975-78  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER,OF LAWS in THE FACULTY OP GRADUATE SOTDIES i n t h e Department of Law  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f o r m i n g t o t h e required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October, 1979 "o)  James Robert Aldridge, 1979  I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the  requirements  f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I a g r e e t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y  a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and  study.  I  f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may representatives.  be g r a n t e d by the Head of my  Department or by  I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g or p u b l i c a t i o n of  t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my  Department of  Law  The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver, Canada  Date:  ii  written  his  this permission.  ABSTRACT  L e g a l p h i l o s o p h y i s viewed a s i r r e l e v a n t by v i r t u a l l y except f o r l e g a l p h i l o s o p h e r s .  everyone  I n t h i s t h e s i s , I suggest t h a t t h e main  reason f o r t h i s i s l e g a l p h i l o s o p h y ' s i n a t t e n t i o n t o t h e q u e s t i o n of why the l a w and l e g a l r e a s o n i n g a r e v a l u a b l e .  Rather  than a d d r e s s i n g t h i s i s s u e ,  j u r i s p r u d e n c e has s i m p l y assumed t h a t t h e law i s v a l u a b l e because i t i s objective. truth.  Legal reasoning i s valuable t o the extent that i t obtains the  The b e l i e f t h a t l a w i s e s s e n t i a l l y a system o f r u l e s stems from  this underlying The  premise.  assumption t h a t t h e o n l y v a l u a b l e r a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s a r e  those w h i c h s i n g l e m i n d e d l y pursue t r u t h , i s not unique t o t h e law. I n f a c t , i t reached  i t s h i g h e s t e x p r e s s i o n i n n i n e t e e n t h and t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y s c i e n c e .  But, i n r e c e n t y e a r s , many p h i l o s o p h e r s have r e j e c t e d t h e n o t i o n t h a t s c i e n c e i s o b j e c t i v e , and based upon i n d e p e n d e n t l y  existing facts.  has not r e s u l t e d i n a r e j e c t i o n o f s c i e n c e ' s v a l u e .  T h i s , however,  S i m i l a r l y , an i n c r e a s i n g  number of l e g a l p h i l o s o p h e r s a r e r e a l i z i n g t h a t t h e b e l i e f i n r u l e s i s a myth.  The law i s n o t , and cannot be o b j e c t i v e .  How then can i t be v a l u a b l e ?  To answer t h i s q u e s t i o n , I s e a r c h f o r t h e f o u n d a t i o n of t h e b e l i e f t h a t t r u t h i s t h e o n l y v a l u e of r a t i o n a l i t y . f o r hundreds of y e a r s w i t h o u t any such n o t i o n . was the good, or v i r t u e , o r e x c e l l e n c e .  I n f a c t , p h i l o s o p h y proceeded The g o a l o f r a t i o n a l  Philosophers strove t o generate  b e a u t i f u l or v a l u a b l e v i s i o n s o f t h e u n i v e r s e .  R a t i o n a l i t y had s e v e r a l t o o l s  which i t c o u l d employ t o t h i s end. L o g i c , t h e t e c h n i q u e one of t h e s e t o o l s .  activity  o f p r o o f , was but  No l e s s i m p o r t a n t was r h e t o r i c , t h e a r t o f p e r s u a s i o n ,  and t h e c r a f t of t h e S o p h i s t s . The  concept of t r u t h as t h e most important v a l u e , was i n t r o d u c e d  i n A t h e n s , by S o c r a t e s , and e s p e c i a l l y by P l a t o and A r i s t o t l e . iii  The to  l e g a c y of t h e s e t h r e e i n d i v i d u a l s was t h e e l e v a t i o n of t r u t h  a p o s i t i o n of u l t i m a t e v a l u e .  T h i s , of c o u r s e , r e s u l t e d i n a  e l e v a t i o n of l o g i c , and a demeaning of r h e t o r i c . can o n l y e l i c i t t r u t h .  corresponding  But l o g i c , by i t s n a t u r e ,  Where t h e r e a r e o t h e r v a l u e s , such a s b e a u t y , l o v e ,  or j u s t i c e , l o g i c i s impotent. The rhetoric.  remainder of the t h e s i s i s d e d i c a t e d t o p r o p o s i n g  I argue t h a t p h i l o s o p h y  a r e v i v a l of  i n g e n e r a l , and t h e l a w i n p a r t i c u l a r ,  should become openly and avowedly r h e t o r i c a l .  I t i s o n l y by p e r s u a d i n g t h e  p u b l i c t h a t i t s d e c i s i o n s a r e j u s t t h a t t h e l a w can ever be j u s t . decisions w i l l  i n e v i t a b l y be d e c i s i o n s of v a l u e .  Legal  Rhetoric i s the t o o l that  can g u i d e our d e c i s i o n makers t o an a p p r e c i a t i o n of our c u l t u r e ' s v a l u e s , and can g i v e them t h e s k i l l t o r e a c h "good", r a t h e r t h a n " t r u e " c o n c l u s i o n s .  iv  TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT  i i i  TABLE OF CONTENTS  v  CHAPTER ONE  1  CHAPTER TWO  '.  23  CHAPTER THREE  61  NOTES TO CHAPTER ONE  92  NOTES TO CHAPTER TWO  93  NOTES TO CHAPTER THREE  94  BIBLIOGRAPHY  96  BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION  v  1  RHETORIC AND THE LAW  —  The disrepute.  CHAPTER ONE  —  p r a c t i c e of r e f l e c t i n g about t h e law has f a l l e n i n t o s e v e r e  When p e o p l e l e a r n t h a t my t h e s i s c o n c e r n s t h e p h i l o s o p h y  most e i t h e r a s k what t h a t i s , o r e l s e p o l i t e l y change t h e s u b j e c t . introduced  of l a w , When I was  t o a l o c a l lawyer as a graduate s t u d e n t o f law, he s t u d i e d me c a r e -  f u l l y and sneered, "Oh, so you're one o f t h o s e a r e you?" a t my f i r s t a r t i c l i n g i n t e r v i e w , my p r o s p e c t i v e  E i g h t months l a t e r ,  employer c a s u a l l y a s s u r e d me t h a t  my p h i l o s o p h i c a l t r a i n i n g had no v a l u e whatsoever t o t h e b u s i n e s s o f p r a c t i c i n g law.  Even i n l a w s c h o o l , j u r i s p r u d e n c e  enrollments, graduates.  and a r e viewed by t h e student body as " b i r d " c o u r s e s f o r I t s teachers  with "substantive" students,  c o u r s e s tend t o be o p t i o n a l w i t h  small  philosophy  a r e urged t o supplement t h e i r " t h e o r e t i c a l " pedagogery  ( i . e . , valuable)  courses.  And t h e v a s t m a j o r i t y of l a w  p r o f e s s o r s , p r a c t i t i o n e r s , and l a y people t h a t I know, a t l e a s t  profess  t o b e l i e v e t h a t l e g a l d e c i s i o n s depend u l t i m a t e l y on t h e whims o f t h e p e r s o n making t h e d e c i s i o n , and t h a t r e f l e c t i n g any deeper than t h a t i s n o t h i n g t h a n s e l f i n d u l g e n t and i m p r a c t i c a l f a n c i f y i n g .  more  Y e t , a t t h e same t i m e , t h e  o t h e r s i d e s o f t h e i r mouths a r e p a y i n g l i p s e r v i c e t o r i g h t s and d u t i e s , t o f i d e l i t y t o t h e law, and t o j u s t i c e . T h i s s t a t e o f a f f a i r s does n o t bode w e l l f o r the law, t h e absence o f a widely  shared commitment t o some form o f t h e o r e t i c a l a p p r e c i a t i o n o f t h e l a w  presents  i t w i t h a t l e a s t two d a n g e r s , b o t h o f w h i c h have a l r e a d y begun t o be  realized.  Without some o v e r a l l b e l i e f s c o n c e r n i n g t h e law, i t i s an e d i f i c e  without a foundation.  Not o n l y i s i t p r e c a r i o u s l y b a l a n c e d , i t has n o t h i n g t o  d i r e c t i t s b u i l d e r s i n t h e e x e r c i s e o f t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y over i t s f u t u r e growth.  The o t h e r  s i d e of t h i s i s w i t h o u t t h e b e l i e f t h a t t h e l a w i n c o r p o r a t e s  2  s o c i e t y ' s v a l u e s , people w i l l see i t as amoral, and something t o be adhered t o or p r o f e s s e d o n l y when i t i s p r a g m a t i c a l l y b e n e f i c i a l t o do so. The l a w i s t h u s c o n c e i v e d o f a s something n e u t r a l i n t h e w o r l d , something t h a t can be used or abused, l i k e e l e c t r i c i t y or t h e w h e e l , but something whose v a l u e l i e s  only i n  i t s e f f e c t s and n o t i n i t s e l f . The purpose o f t h i s paper i s t o e x p l o r e t h e means by w h i c h we can a c q u i r e and e x e r c i s e an a p p r e c i a t i o n o f t h e l a w i t s e l f . Why does i t m a t t e r  How i s t h e l a w v a l u a b l e ?  t o us?  I f we a r e t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e law's v a l u e , a good p l a c e t o s t a r t i s w i t h some of the c o n c l u s i o n s t h a t l e g a l p h i l o s o p h e r s have reached.  A f t e r a l l , they  must bear some o f t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e ignominy w h i c h l e g a l t h e o r y has a c q u i r e d i n t h e minds o f a l l but themselves.  F o r even though few people c a r e t o  i n d u l g e themselves i n l e g a l p h i l o s o p h y , t h e p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s of t h e p h i l o s o p h e r s have managed t o seep through t h e body o f t h e law, i n f l u e n c i n g t h e p e r c e p t i o n s and a c t i o n s of even i t s most concrete-minded p a r t i c i p a n t s . Law i s a s e t of r u l e s . any coherent  T h i s , we a r e t o l d , i s t h e s t a r t i n g p l a c e f o r  t h e o r y of law. I n f a c t , i f we l o o k a t t h e h i s t o r y of l e g a l p h i l o -  sophy, t h i s b e l i e f can be seen t o have been a x i o m a t i c f o r many c e n t u r i e s . N a t u r a l law has h e l d t h a t t h e law i s t h e s e t o f r u l e s r e f l e c t e d i n t h e n a t u r a l o r d e r of the u n i v e r s e , or s t i p u l a t e d by t h e d i v i n e w i l l .  P o s i t i v e l a w has h e l d  t h a t t h e law i s t h e s e t of r u l e s s t i p u l a t e d by t h e s o v e r e i g n , by t h e c u l t u r a l w i l l , by t h e c o u r t s , o r by t h e s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e o f t h e l a w i t s e l f .  Despite  t h e i r many d i f f e r e n c e s , f o r b o t h t h e r e i s t h e b e l i e f t h a t law i s a s e t of r u l e s . T h i s c l a i m i s based upon e p i s t e m o l o g y  and upon v a l u e s .  Philosophers  have always b e l i e v e d t h a t , i n o r d e r f o r t h e l a w t o be knowable, i t must be t o t a l l y independent and autonomous f r o m any p a r t i c u l a r p e r s o n , and perhaps from man h i m s e l f .  The d e s i r e t o d i s c o v e r t r u e p r o p o s i t i o n s about t h e law has m o t i v a t e d  every l e g a l p h i l o s o p h y s i n c e c l a s s i c a l t i m e s .  The d i f f e r e n c e s between competing  3  t h e o r i e s have a c c o r d i n g l y always r e f l e c t e d changing c e r n i n g the means by w h i c h we a c q u i r e knowledge.  t h e o r e t i c a l f a s h i o n s con-  When i t was b e l i e v e d t h a t  knowledge c o u l d o n l y f l o w from d i v i n e r e v e l a t i o n , or r a t i o n a l i s t i c of a b s t r a c t forms, n a t u r a l law was  the orthodox,  contemplation  i f not t h e o n l y , l e g a l t h e o r y .  The r i s e of e m p i r i c i s m and' d e c l i n e of m e t a p h y s i c s  r e s u l t e d i n the development  of l e g a l p o s i t i v i s m , and more r e c e n t r e f i n e m e n t s i n e m p i r i c i s m has l e d to the e n t h u s i a s t i c a p p l i c a t i o n of set t h e o r y and l i n g u i s t i c a n a l y s i s t o the t h e o r y of law.  Even l e g a l r e a l i s m can be seen t o be m e r e l y t h e a d a p t a t i o n of b e h a v i o u r a l  s o c i a l s c i e n c e to the study of l e g a l d e c i s i o n making. Why things?  s h o u l d l e g a l t h e o r y be so i n t i m a t e l y t i e d t o i s s u e s of how  T h i s i s the " v a l u e base" t h a t I r e f e r r e d t o above.  i n almost every Western p h i l o s o p h y i s g i v e n t o t r u t h . other values pale i n t o i n s i g n i f i c a n c e .  we know  The h i g h e s t v a l u e  B e f o r e the t r u t h , a l l  I n o r d e r , t h e n , f o r the law to be  as  v a l u a b l e as i t must be, i t must be one of those t h i n g s w h i c h l i e w i t h i n t r u t h ' s domain.  T h i s u l t i m a t e v a l u e i s acknowledged i n the d e s c r i p t i o n s of such " v a l u e s "  as c e r t a i n t y , c l a r i t y , and p r e d i c t a b i l i t y w h i c h n a t u r a l i s t s and p o s i t i v i s t s a s s e r t must e x i s t w i t h i n the  alike  law.  The n e c e s s a r y r e l a t i o n s h i p between law and the t r u t h has thus never been an i s s u e i n l e g a l p h i l o s o p h y .  I n a sense, though, i t i s the source of the  q u e s t i o n w h i c h has been the c e n t r a l c o n c e r n of a l l l e g a l p h i l o s o p h y . t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between law and m o r a l i t y ?  How  What i s  can we r e c o n c i l e t h e r e s i d e n c e  of law i n the p a l a c e of t r u t h , w i t h t h e e x i l e of j u s t i c e t o the slums of o p i n i o n ? P h i l o s o p h e r s have c o n s i s t e n t l y t a k e n one of two p o s s i b l e avenues of approach.  They have e l e v a t e d j u s t i c e a l o n g w i t h law t o t h e domain of t r u t h .  Or, they have d e n i e d t h a t t h e r e i s any n e c e s s a r y c o n n e c t i o n between the two a t all.  Any apparent  r e l a t i o n s h i p i s e i t h e r t h e r e s u l t of good l u c k , or e l s e of t h e  u n r e a l i t y of j u s t i c e .  4  The former i s t h e t a c t i c n o t o n l y of t h e n a t u r a l t h i n k e r s , b u t a l s o of many modern w r i t e r s , such as Ronald Dworkin, o r J . C. Smith and Sam Coval, who say t h a t a method can be found f o r d i s c o v e r i n g t h e r i g h t p r i n c i p l e s o r t h e " c o r r e c t h i e r a r c h i c a l o r d e r of a l e g a l community's v a l u e s " . economics-minded  I t i s t h e r o u t e t a k e n by  p h l o s o p h e r s such as John Rawls who d e f i n e j u s t i c e and l a w i n  terms o f a m a t e r i a l i s t i c d e f i n i t i o n o f r a t i o n a l b e h a v i o u r . The l a t t e r horn o f t h e dilemma i s p r e f e r r e d by such t r a d i t i o n a l p o s i t i v i s t s such as John A u s t i n , Hans K e l s e n and H.L.A. H a r t , as w e l l as by t h e l e g a l r e a l i s t s and most M a r x i s t s . Throughout  t h i s paper I s h a l l be a d v o c a t i n g  t h a t t h e way t o c o n f r o n t  t h i s dilemma i s t o choose n e i t h e r o f t h e s e h o r n s , b u t t o pursue a t h i r d p o s s i b l e choice.  I propose t h a t we cease t h i n k i n g about t h e law s o l e l y i n terms of i t s  t r u t h o r o b j e c t i v i t y , and r e s t o r e i t t o t h e domain o f o p i n i o n , where most v a l u a b l e t h i n g s i n our l i v e s r e s i d e . a r t and c o o k i n g .  F o r i t i s o p i n i o n t h a t governs l o v e and  I t i s our s u b j e c t i v i t y , our p a s s i o n s  of our l i v e s , and a n y t h i n g  other  t h a t r e a l l y count i n most  t h a t denounces a l l of t h e s e , renounces i t s own v a l u e .  But w a i t , here i s something c u r i o u s .  F o r , a s I have a l r e a d y  pointed  out, t h e law bases i t s c l a i m o f v a l u e on i t s o b j e c t i v i t y , on i t s independence from i n d i v i d u a l f e e l i n g s and b e l i e f s . C l a i m s of o b j e c t i v i t y a r e i n e v i t a b l y rationality.  So i t i s w i t h t h e law.  the argument b e g i n s . facts.  Therefore,  objective  Rationality  framed and argued i n terms of  Law must be r a t i o n a l i n order t o v a l u a b l e ,  i s concerned s o l e l y w i t h a s c e r t a i n a b l e , o b j e c t i v e  t o be v a l u a b l e , l a w must be concerned w i t h a s c e r t a i n a b l e ,  facts. Now, t h e word " r a t i o n a l i t y " i s i n l a r g e p a r t a term o f a p p r o v a l .  To  say t h a t something i s " r a t i o n a l " i s c e r t a i n l y t o suggest t h a t i t i s a t l e a s t prima f a c i e good, t o say t h a t i t i s v a l u a b l e .  I am happy, t h e r e f o r e , t o g i v e my  a f f i r m a t i o n t o t h e f i r s t premise of t h e above s y l l o g i s m .  So, i f , as I have  5  p r o m i s e d , I am going t o r e j e c t i t s c o n c l u s i o n , the t r u t h of the second premise:  l o g i c t e l l s me  t h a t I must r e j e c t  t h a t r a t i o n a l i t y i s concerned s o l e l y w i t h  ascertainable, objective facts. Before it  t a c k l i n g such a f o r m i d a b l y  entrenched maxim as t h i s , however,  seems prudent t o examine i t s source and e x t e n t .  From where d i d l e g a l  theory  a c q u i r e such a b e l i e f ? Without a doubt, the most s i g n i f i c a n t development i n r e c e n t human h i s t o r y has been the t r i u m p h of e x p e r i m e n t a l  science.  From i t s modern  genesis  i n the minds of F r a n c i s Bacon, Isaac Newton, and D a v i d Hume, e m p i r i c i s m empowered man  t o a c h i e v e a t e c h n o l o g i c a l m a s t e r y of h i s u n i v e r s e t h a t  c u l t u r e s c o u l d never have imagined.  The  o t h e r areas t o t r y t o emulate s c i e n c e ' s s u c c e s s by e m u l a t i n g people who  t o the s c i e n t i f i c method.  earlier  d r a m a t i c a l l y v i s i b l e s u c c e s s e s of  s c i e n c e i n the f i e l d s of p h y s i c s , astronomy and b i o l o g y has  The  has  led thinkers i n i t s method.  developed the t h e o r y of s c i e n c e ' s s u c c e s s a s c r i b e d i t They can be thought of as u s i n g D a v i d Hume's famous  e x h o r t a t i o n as a s t a r t i n g p o i n t : I f we take i n our hand any volume,' of d i v i n i t y or s c h o o l metap h y s i c s , f o r i n s t a n c e , l e t us ask, Does i t c o n t a i n any a b s t r a c t r e a s o n i n g c o n c e r n i n g q u a n t i t y or number? No. Does i t c o n t a i n any e x p e r i m e n t a l r e a s o n i n g c o n c e r n i n g m a t t e r of f a c t and e x i s t e n c e ? No. Commit i t t h e n to the f l a m e s : f o r i t can c o n t a i n n o t h i n g but s o p h i s t r y and i l l u s i o n . ^ [emphasis h i s ) (  The  o n l y v a l u a b l e t h i n k i n g c o n c e r n s p r o p o s i t i o n s c a p a b l e of  proven t o be e i t h e r t r u e or f a l s e .  being  U n l e s s a statement i s n e c e s s a r i l y t r u e or  f a l s e because of i t s l o g i c a l or m a t h e m a t i c a l n a t u r e , or u n l e s s i t d e s c r i b e s a sensory experience,  i t i s m e a n i n g l e s s and w i t h o u t  r a t i o n a l value.  Accordingly,  s c i e n t i f i c t h i n k i n g must d e a l o n l y w i t h such p r o p o s i t i o n s . Sometimes, however, we  encounter a statement such as "a body  continues  i n i t s s t a t e of r e s t or m o t i o n u n l e s s a c t e d upon by some f o r c e " or " c a t s always l a n d on t h e i r f e e t " .  These a r e n e i t h e r l o g i c a l l y t r u e or f a l s e , but n e i t h e r  are  6  they s u b j e c t t o e m p i r i c a l c o n f i r m a t i o n . cats.  No one can e x p e r i e n c e a l l b o d i e s o r a l l  But i t i s j u s t t h i s k i n d o f g e n e r a l o r u n i v e r s a l statement  that gives  s c i e n c e i t s q u a l i t y of independence and o b j e c t i v i t y , as w e l l as i t s p r e d i c t i v e value.  So t o e x p l a i n how g e n e r a l statements  can be found t o be t r u e o r f a l s e , t o account  d e s c r i b i n g v a r i o u s c l a s s e s of t h i n g s f o r the meaningfulness  of t h e o r i e s ,  the s c i e n t i f i c method was i n v e n t e d . The  s c i e n t i f i c method i s b o t h a j u s t i f i c a t i o n and a guarantee.  R e f e r r i n g t o i t always e s t a b l i s h e s t h a t one's a c t i v i t i e s a r e r a t i o n a l , and hence valuable.  D u t i f u l r e l i a n c e on i t ensures t h a t i t s p r a c t i t i o n e r w i l l never make  meaningless  s t a t e m e n t s , n o r w i l l he f a l l i n t o f a l s i t i e s .  He i s guaranteed t o  d i s c o v e r t h e t r u t h , and n o t h i n g b u t t h e t r u t h . Simply p u t , t h e s c i e n t i f i c method r e q u i r e s p r o c e e d i n g fashion.  F a c t s a r e observed,  formulated.  the i n i t i a l l y observed the w o r l d .  A t h e o r y , o r group of u n i v e r s a l s t a t e m e n t s , i s  Each g e n e r a l statement  statements about f a c t s .  i n the following  can be reduced  d e d u c t i v e l y t o a s e t of s i m p l e  Some of t h e s e " o b s e r v a t i o n s t a t e m e n t s " w i l l d e s c r i b e f a c t s , w h i l e t h e o t h e r s w i l l c o n s t i t u t e p r e d i c t i o n s about  The s c i e n t i s t conducts experiments  t o t e s t these p r e d i c t i o n s .  Each  time t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l r e s u l t s c o i n c i d e w i t h a p r e d i c t i o n , t h e t h e o r y i s s a i d t o have been " c o n f i r m e d " , or " v e r i f i e d " .  The more t i m e s a s c i e n t i s t has " c o n f i r m e d "  a t h e o r y , t h e more he i s j u s t i f i e d i n b e l i e v i n g i t i s t r u e . of t h e p r e d i c t i o n s d e d u c t i v e l y generated  from t h e t h e o r y f a i l s i t s e x p e r i m e n t a l  t e s t , t h e e n t i r e t h e o r y has been " f a l s i f i e d " doned. old  B u t , i f a s i n g l e one  o r " d i s c o n f i r m e d " and must be aban-  A new t h e o r y must be f o r m u l a t e d t h a t a c c o u n t s f o r a l l o f t h e d a t a o f t h e  t h e o r y , and i t must make new p r e d i c t i o n s t h a t t h e s c i e n t i s t c a n s e t out t o  confirm.^ The e s s e n t i a l p o i n t s u n d e r l y i n g t h e s c i e n t i f i c method's c l a i m t o rationality are: (1)  No p r o p o s i t i o n i s s a i d t o be t r u e u n l e s s i t i s l o g i c a l l y t r u e or e m p i r i c a l l y confirmed.  7  (2)  I n c o n s i s t e n c y w i t h observed f a c t i s t h e o n l y grounds f o r , and always r e s u l t s i n t h e abandonment o r r e j e c t i o n o f a t h e o r y .  (3)  Emotion, p e r s o n a l i n t e r e s t and a e s t h e t i c a p p e a l a r e never f a c t o r s i n t h e a c c e p t a n c e o r r e j e c t i o n of any t h e o r y .  I t c a n be f a i r l y midpoint to  s a i d t h a t v i r t u a l l y e v e r y t h e o r y developed  up t o t h e  of t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y t h a t e x p l a i n s t h e success o f s c i e n c e adhered  some e l a b o r a t e d v e r s i o n o f t h e p a t t e r n sketched above.  p o s i t i v i s m was t h e h i g h e s t development of t h i s The  The s c h o o l o f l o g i c a l  outlook.  p o s i t i v i s t c o n c e p t i o n t h a t law i s a s e t o f r u l e s i s t h e r e s u l t of  a d e s i r e t o a p p l y t h i s s c i e n t i f i c o r o b j e c t i v e model t o l e g a l d e c i s i o n making. L i k e t h e s c i e n t i s t , t h e judge i s , i n p r i n c i p l e ,  c a p a b l e o f making t h e r i g h t  d e t e r m i n a t i o n , i f he v i g o r o u s l y a p p l i e s the proper method. f r o n t e d w i t h a " t h e o r y " c o n c e r n i n g t h e law.  The j u d g e i s con-  I t w i l l n o r m a l l y be a g e n e r a l o r  u n i v e r s a l statement s i m i l a r t o t h e s c i e n t i f i c t h e o r i e s d e s c r i b e d above.  It will  s t a t e t h a t , i n every s t a t e o f a f f a i r s of a c e r t a i n t y p e , a s p e c i f i c l e g a l d e t e r m i n a t i o n must be made.  I t c o u l d be t h a t , whenever one p e r s o n p h y s i c a l l y  another p e r s o n , t h a t p e r s o n i s g u i l t y of a s s a u l t .  strikes  Or, i t c o u l d be t h a t , whenever  a person e n t e r s i n t o a c o n t r a c t w h i l e s u f f e r i n g from m e n t a l d e l u s i o n s , t h a t cont r a c t i s not b i n d i n g . laws can be f o r m u l a t e d .  C l e a r l y , a c o u n t l e s s number o f t h e s e " t h e o r i e s " o r g e n e r a l I t i s t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of a j u d g e t o d e t e r m i n e whether  a proposed " t h e o r y " i s t r u e ; whether a p u r p o r t e d How does he do t h i s ?  law r e a l l y i s t h e l a w .  F i r s t he o b s e r v e s t h e " l e g a l f a c t s " .  " l e g a l f a c t s " a r e not t o be confused w i t h t h e f a c t s o f t h e case. a r e t h e f a c t s of t h e l e g a l i n s t i t u t i o n i t s e l f .  These  "Legal f a c t s "  They i n c l u d e a l l o f t h e s t a t u t e s ,  r e g u l a t i o n s , and p r e v i o u s l e g a l judgements w h i c h c o n s t i t u t e t h e j u d g e ' s l e g a l universe. He t e s t s t h e " l e g a l t h e o r y " o r p u r p o r t e d l a w a g a i n s t a l l o f t h e s e Each time he can f i n d a " f a c t " ( d e c i s i o n , s t a t u t e ) t h a t would be l o g i c a l l y c r i b e d by t h e "law" i n q u e s t i o n , he " c o n f i r m s " h i s t h e o r y —  "facts". pres-  he f i n d s a u t h o r i t y  8  for  h i s law.  B u t , i f a s i n g l e a u t h o r i t a t i v e case o r s t a t u t e i s found w h i c h i s  l o g i c a l l y i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h a d e d u c t i v e l y generated q u e s t i o n , t h e n t h a t " l a w " i s not t h e law a t a l l .  i n s t a n c e of t h e law i n  The t h e o r y i s r e f u t e d .  L i k e t h e s c i e n t i s t , t h e judge must then g e n e r a t e a new t h e o r y a new e x p r e s s i o n of t h e l a w —  —  w h i c h i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h a l l of t h e " f a c t s "  r e c o g n i z e d i n t h e system, and w h i c h can t h e n be t e s t e d a g a i n s t o t h e r An i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e l a w must be generated  facts.  f o r w h i c h a u t h o r i t y can be found.  Opposing c o u n s e l , i n t h i s v i e w , a r e n o t h i n g more than s o u r c e s of i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e j u d g e , and t h e t r a p p i n g s of t h e a d v e r s a r y system a r e merely t e c h n i c a l s a f e g u a r d s t o ensure a h i g h degree o f f a c t u a l r e l i a b i l i t y , t o ensure that a l l relevant " f a c t s " are considered. I t i s e s s e n t i a l t o t h i s v i s i o n t h a t t h e j u d g e be o b j e c t i v e and impartial.  I n f a c t , a person who p u b l i c l y d e n i e s t h i s o b j e c t i v i t y c a n , i n  c e r t a i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s , be found g u i l t y of contempt of c o u r t , and be e i t h e r i m p r i s o n e d or f i n e d or b o t h .  O b j e c t i v i t y e n a b l e s t h e j u d g e t o d i s c o v e r what t h e  law i s w i t h o u t h i s judgement o r r a t i o n a l i t y b e i n g clouded by p e r s o n a l i n t e r e s t , f e e l i n g s or o t h e r a r b i t r a r y r c o n s i d e r a t i o n s .  He must be l i k e t h e s c i e n t i s t ,  d i s p a s s i o n a t e l y engaged i n t h e s e a r c h f o r t r u t h . So i t i s t h a t t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l v i s i o n of l e g a l r e a s o n i n g l a y s c l a i m to  t h e same earmarks of r a t i o n a l i t y t h a t a r e espoused by s c i e n t i f c r e a s o n i n g . (1)  No l a w i s a p p l i e d u n l e s s i t i s d e d u c t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o a v a l i d s t a t u t e o r i s supported by a u t h o r i t a t i v e case l a w .  (2)  I n c o n s i s t e n c y w i t h some a u t h o r i t a t i v e r u l e i s t h e o n l y grounds f o r , and always r e s u l t s i n , t h e abandonment o r r e j e c t i o n of a " l e g a l t h e o r y " o r p u t a t i v e law.  (3)  Emotion, p e r s o n a l i n t e r e s t and a e s t h e t i c a p p e a l a r e never f a c t o r s i n t h e acceptance o r r e j e c t i o n of any p u t a t i v e law.  R u l e s a r e t o l e g a l r e a s o n i n g as f a c t s a r e t o s c i e n t i f i c  reasoning.  F a c t s g i v e s c i e n t i f i c r e a s o n i n g i t s v a l u e by t y i n g i t t o p h y s i c a l r e a l i t y , t o truth. truth.  R u l e s g i v e l e g a l r e a s o n i n g i t s v a l u e by t y i n g i t t o l e g a l r e a l i t y , t o  9  Much of t h e debate about l e g a l r e a s o n i n g has been whether i t can be r e a l l y s c i e n t i f i c i n t h e sense t h a t I have d e s c r i b e d .  I n f a c t t h e h i s t o r y of  l e g a l p o s i t i v i s m can be seen a s an attempt t o g a i n f o r t h e l a w t h e s c i e n t i f i c and o b j e c t i v e r i g o r t h a t i t s b i g b r o t h e r , l o g i c a l p o s i t i v i s m , c l a i m e d f o r science. However, w h i l e l e g a l p h i l o s o p h y has been t r y i n g t o c a t c h up t o t h e c e r t a i n t y and o b j e c t i v i t y o f s c i e n c e , an i n c r e a s i n g number of s c i e n t i f i c t h i n k e r s have been r e a l i z i n g t h a t s c i e n c e i t s e l f i s n o t o b j e c t i v e .  Spurred by t h e impact  of r e l a t i v i s t i c p h y s i c s a s w e l l a s by e x i s t e n t i a l i s m , by t h e r e j e c t i o n of a u t h o r i t y i n t h e West and by t h e f a i l u r e o f t e c h n o c r a c i e s around t h e w o r l d , a new group of t h i n k e r s has emerged who have c h a l l e n g e d t h e t r a d i t i o n a l d e s c r i p t i o n o f s c i e n t i f i c method, and found themselves examining t h e f o u n d a t i o n s o f 3 rationality The  itself. common theme of a l l of t h e s e w r i t e r s i s t h a t human knowledge  does n o t , never has, and never w i l l develop  i n t h e f a s h i o n d e s c r i b e d by o b j e c -  tive rationality. The  basis of s c i e n t i f i c reasoning'svvalue  i s , as I have s a i d , t h a t  i t grounds a l l o f i t s c l a i m s on f a c t s , on o b s e r v a t i o n s and e x p e r i e n c e s of t h e world.  F a c t s a r e t h e u l t i m a t e a r b i t e r s o f our b e l i e f s —  independent, o b j e c t i v e . this claim.  The a t t a c k on o b j e c t i v i t y has f o c u s s e d on p r e c i s e l y  S c i e n t i s t s everywhere began t o r e a l i z e , and t o p o i n t o u t , t h a t  f a c t s and t h e o r i e s a r e s i m p l y not i n s e p a r a b l e . laden".  t h e y a r e autonomous,  Every observation i s "theory-  E x p e r i e n c e s r e q u i r e t h e p e r s o n a l involvement  of the experiencer.  The  n a t u r e of t h e e x p e r i e n c e , t h e s e t o f f a c t s w h i c h i s p e r c e i v e d , i s always a f f e c t e d by t h e person's b e l i e f s and v a l u e s .  There i s no such t h i n g as  obj e c t i v i t y . Even a t t h e most fundamental l e v e l , human v a l u e s and i n t e r e s t s d e t e r m i n e t h e p i c t u r e .of the u n i v e r s e t h a t we p a i n t f o r o u r s e l v e s t o contemplate.  10  Compared t o t h e c o u n t l e s s eons t h a t have t r a n s p i r e d i n the u n i v e r s e , compared t o t h e immense cosmic r e g i o n s w h i c h c o n t a i n n o t h i n g but i n t e r s t e l l a r d u s t , t h e e n t i r e h i s t o r y and m a t e r i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of the human s p e c i e s i s so t r i v i a l t o warrant  n o t h i n g but the s c a n t i e s t a t t e n t i o n . And  s c i e n t i s t s , l o o k s a t the u n i v e r s e t h i s way. standable)  as  y e t no one, i n c l u d i n g  I t i s o n l y our  ( e m i n e n t l y under-  i n t e r e s t i n o u r s e l v e s t h a t l e a d s us t o v a l u e f a c t s i n such a way  as  4 t o p l a c e us f i r m l y a t the c e n t r e of a t t e n t i o n . Our  e x p e r i e n c e s are determined not o n l y by the w o r l d , but a l s o by  our v a l u e s , our c u l t u r e , and our p r e v i o u s l y h e l d b e l i e f s .  Any attempt t o  e x p l a i n the a c q u i s i t i o n , development and t e s t i n g of knowledge t h a t does not account f o r a l l of t h e s e f a c t o r s , i s n e c e s s a r i l y doomed t o f a i l u r e .  Exclusive  a t t e n t i o n on the w o r l d as' the l e g i t i m a t e s o u r c e of knowlege, l e d t o the d e s c r i p t i o n of a method w h i c h , i f f o l l o w e d , would r e n d e r a l l human development impossible.  V i o l a t i o n s of these m e t h o d o l o g i c a l r u l e s a r e not a c c i d e n t a l o r  m e r e l y the r e s u l t s of human f a i l i n g s , but a r e n e c e s s a r y f o r p r o g r e s s . Indeed, one of the most s t r i k i n g f e a t u r e s of r e c e n t d i s c u s s i o n s i n the h i s t o r y and p h i l o s o p h y of s c i e n c e i s the r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t events and developments, such as the i n v e n t i o n of atomism i n a n t i q u i t y , t h e C o p e r n i c a n R e v o l u t i o n , the r i s e of modern atomism ( k i n e t i c t h e o r y ; d i s p e r s i o n t h e o r y ; s t e r e o c h e m i s t r y ; quantum t h e o r y ) , the g r a d u a l emergence of the wave t h e o r y of l i g h t , o c c u r r e d o n l y because some t h i n k e r s e i t h e r d e c i d e d not t o be bound by c e r t a i n 'obvious' m e t h o d o l o g i c a l r u l e s , or because t h e y u n w i t t i n g l y broke them. [emphasis h i s ] Methods t h a t i n s i s t on c o n s i s t e n c y w i t h the f a c t s a r e r e a l l y  insisting  upon the f a c t s as viewed through the framework of some o t h e r , u s u a l l y o l d e r and widely accepted,  theory.  bound up w i t h our, own methodological  Because a l l of our p e r c e p t i o n s a r e so i n t i m a t e l y  subj e c t i v e , h i s t o r i c a l , m y t h i c a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l makeup,  i n s i s t e n c e upon c o n s i s t e n c y w i t h the f a c t s r e s u l t s i n c o n t i n u e d  adherence t o the o l d e r , r a t h e r than the b e t t e r t h e o r y . The C o p e r n i c a n  R e v o l u t i o n i s p r o b a b l y the most d i s c u s s e d  example of the growth of s c i e n t i f i c knowledge.  historical  T h i s i s no doubt p a r t i a l l y  due  11  to the dramatic  n a t u r e of t h e change i n w o r l d v i e w s t h a t was i n v o l v e d i n s h i f t i n g  from a g e o c e n t r i c t o a sun-centred  universe.  I t i s a l s o e x p l a i n e d by t h e  f a m i l i a r i t y of t h e c o n c e p t s w i t h w h i c h i t d e a l t . When I was i n p u b l i c s c h o o l , and even l a t e r i n h i g h s c h o o l , t h e s t o r y of t h e C o p e r n i c a n R e v o l u t i o n was o f t e n used t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e w o r k i n g s o f t h e s c i e n t i f i c method.  According  t o t h i s myth, s c h o l a r s had always b e l i e v e d t h a t  t h e e a r t h was s t a t i o n a r y and l a y a t t h e c e n t r e of t h e u n i v e r s e . was r e a s o n a b l e  Their belief  enough, because i t a c c o r d e d w i t h a l l o f t h e f a c t s t h a t people  could experience.  However, G a l i l e o G a l i l e i came a l o n g and proved t h a t t h e  C o p e r n i c a n h y p o t h e s i s was t r u e .  That i s , u s i n g h i s t e l e s c o p e , he showed t h a t  the P t o l m a i c t h e o r y c o u l d not account f o r a l l o f t h e f a c t s (some of i t s p r e d i c t i o n s f a i l e d ) t h a t t h e C o p e r n i c a n h y p o t h e s i s n o t o n l y e x p l a i n e d or p r e d i c t e d a l l of t h e w e l l confirmed experiment c o n f i r m e d  f a c t s , but t h a t i t a l s o made new p r e d i c t i o n s , w h i c h t o be t r u e .  centre of the u n i v e r s e .  A c c o r d i n g l y , he announced t h a t t h e / s u n was t h e  U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e Church was dominated by s u p e r s t i -  t i o u s and s e l f - i n t e r e s t e d b i g o t s who i g n o r e d G a l i l e o ' s p r o o f s and who proceeded to persecute  him t o f o r c e him t o renounce t h e t r u t h .  t h e myth c o n c l u d e s , of r e b u r y i n g i t .  Despite h i s recantation,  t h e t r u t h had been d i s c o v e r e d and t h e r e was no p o s s i b i l i t y  I n t h e f a c e o f s c i e n t i f i c , o b j e c t i v e p r o o f , t h e Church  e v e n t u a l l y had no c h o i c e but t o g r u d g i n g l y a c c e p t  the h e l i o c e n t r i c  thesis.  C a r e f u l study o f what r e a l l y happened i n t h e s c i e n t i f i c r e v o l u t i o n shows t h a t t h i s i s a l l f a n c i f u l nonsense.  I n f a c t , t h e Church, e s p e c i a l l y t h e  J e s u i t O r d e r , had been v e r y i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e use o f a s u n - c e n t r e d the u n i v e r s e , such a s t h a t of C o p e r n i c u s , phenomena, o f " s a v i n g t h e appearances".  model o f  as a means o f p r e d i c t i n g s t e l l a r However, a s an a c t u a l d e s c r i p t i o n o f  r e a l i t y , G a l i l e o ' s c l a i m s not o n l y c o n t r a d i c t e d S c r i p t u r e , they were n o t v e r y plausible,  But i t was e x a c t l y t h i s c l a i m t h a t G a l i l e o made, and w h i c h g o t him  into trouble.  He proceeded and argued a s though h i s t h e o r y had been r i g o r o u s l y  12  demonstrated and the burden of p r o o f was S c r i p t u r e , to disprove  on h i s opponents, t h e d e f e n d e r s  of  it.  Throughout the document The L e t t e r t o t h e Grand Duchess C h r i s t i n a , £which was the i n i t i a l source of t h e Church's i r e ] ' G a l i l e o c o m p l e t e l y evaded any a s t r o n o m i c a l o r p h y s i c a l d i s c u s s i o n of t h e C o p e r n i c a n systems. He s i m p l y gave t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t i t was proven beyond doubt. I f he had t a l k e d t o t h e p o i n t , i n s t e a d of around i t , he would have had t o admit t h a t C o p e r n i c u s ' f o r t y - o d d e p i c y c l e s and e c c e n t r i c s were not o n l y not proven but a p h y s i c a l i m p o s s i b i l i t y , a g e o m e t r i c a l d e v i c e and n o t h i n g e l s e ; t h a t t h e absence of an a n n u a l p a r a l l a x j . i e . of any apparent s h i f t i n the p o s i t i o n of t h e f i x e d s t a r s , i n s p i t e of the new t e l e s c o p i c p r e c i s i o n , weighed h e a v i l y a g a i n s t C o p e r n i c u s ; t h a t the phases of Venus d i s p r o v e d P t o l e m y , but not H e r a k l e i d e s or Tycho [ o t h e r g e o c e n t r i c t h e o r i e s j i ; and t h a t a l l he c o u l d c l a i m f o r t h e C o p e r n i c a n h y p o t h e s i s was t h a t i t d e s c r i b e d c e r t a i n phenomena ( t h e r e t r o g e s s i o n ) more e c o n o m i c a l l y than Pt61emy; as a g a i n s t t h i s t h e above-mentioned p h y s i c a l o b j e c t i o n s would have c a r r i e d t h e day. F o r i t must be remembered t h a t the system w h i c h G a l i l e o advocated was the orthodox C o p e r n i c a n 'system, d e s i g n e d by t h e Canon h i m s e l f , n e a r l y a c e n t u r y b e f o r e K e p l e r threw out the e p i c y c l e s and t r a n s f o r m e d t h e a b s t r u s e p a p e r - c o n s t r u c t i o n i n t o a workable m e c h a n i c a l model. I n c a p a b l e of acknowledging t h a t any of h i s c o n t e m p o r a r i e s had a share i n the p r o g r e s s of astronomy, G a l i l e o b l i n d l y , and indeed s u i c i d a l l y , i g n o r e d K e p l e r ' s work t o t h e end, p e r s i s t i n g i n t h e f u t i l e attempt t o bludgeon the w o r l d i n t o a c c e p t i n g a F e r r i s wheel w i t h f o r t y - e i g h t e p i c y c l e s as ' r i g o r o u s l y demonstrated' physical reality. But, w h i l e G a l i l e o f a i l e d i n o b t a i n i n g consent system, i t was  t o t h e d e t a i l s of h i s  c e r t a i n l y h i s work and p o p u l a r i t y t h a t r e s u l t e d i n the change  i n w o r l d v i e w from g e o c e n t r i c i t y t o h e l o c e n t r i c i t y .  I f i t wasn't  o b j e c t i v e proof t h a t made t h i s advancement p o s s i b l e , what was up i n one word, i t was  scientific,  i t ? To sum i t  rhetoric.  G a l i l e o used p s y c h o l o g i c a l t r i c k s , eloquent  language,  appeals to  emotions and j u s t p l a i n d i s h o n e s t y i n h i s campaign t o advance h i s b e l i e f s a g a i n s t the b e l i e v e r s i n g e o c e n t r i c i t y .  He d i d t h i s i n o r d e r t o get people  r e j e c t t h e i r o l d e x p e r i e n c e and thus see the w o r l d i n a t o t a l l y new way. e x p e r i e n c e s upon w h i c h he based the C o p e r n i c a n v i e w was of h i s own  f e r t i l e i m a g i n a t i o n , i t has been i n v e n t e d .  to The  " n o t h i n g but t h e r e s u l t  13  Whenever an observed f a c t was proposed as a r e f u t a t i o n t o C o p e r n i c a n i s m , G a l i l e o delved  i n t o the f a c t t o f i n d t h e t h e o r e t i c a l or " n a t u r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n "  that underlies t h i s offensive observation. t o analogy and  He then used a p p e a l s t o common sense,  t o a e s t h e t i c a p p e a l t o d e t h r o n e t h i s n a t u r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and  r e p l a c e i t w i t h a n o t h e r , one  t h a t r e s u l t e d i n the o b s e r v a t i o n  tradictory effect.  t h e o r e t i c a l c l a i m c o n s t i t u t e d an a u x i l i a r y ,  T h i s new  unproven h y p o t h e s i s , w h i c h supported and was theory —  i n t h i s case C o p e r n i c a n i s m .  itself  So i t was  l o s i n g i t s conbut  supported by the main  t h a t G a l i l e o suggested such  t h i n g s as the law of i n e r t i a and a t h e o r y of o p t i c s t h a t d e f u s e d troublesome facts.  I n f a c t by combining a l l of t h e s e p r e c a r i o u s and  G a l i l e o made p o s s i b l e a new  k i n d of  "irrational"  beliefs,  experience.  ... w h i l e t h e p r e - C o p e r n i c a n astronomy was i n t r o u b l e (was c o n f r o n t e d by a s e r i e s of r e f u t i n g i n s t a n c e s and i m p l a u s i b i l i t i e s ) , the C o p e r n i c a n t h e o r y was i n even g r e a t e r t r o u b l e (was c o n f r o n t e d by even more d r a s t i c r e f u t i n g i n s t a n c e s and i m p l a u s i b i l i t i e s ) — but t h a t b e i n g i n harmony w i t h s t i l l f u r t h e r inadequate t h e o r i e s f i n e r t i a , o p t i c s j i t gained s t r e n g t h , and was r e t a i n e d , t h e r e f u t a t i o n s b e i n g made g i n e f f e c t i v e by ad hoc hypotheses and c l e v e r t e c h n i q u e s of p e r s u a s i o n , [emphasis h i s j P a u l K. Feyerabend and  o t h e r s have argued t h a t e v e r y s c i e n t i f i c advance 9  has been preceded by t h i s k i n d of i r r a t i o n a l , n o n - m e t h o d o l o g i c a l a c t i v i t y . R e l i a n c e on the f a c t s can o n l y v e r i f y a t h e o r y t o w h i c h the s c i e n t i s t a l r e a d y made a commitment —  w h i c h he a l r e a d y b e l i e v e s i s t r u e .  Facts  t h e r e f o r e , p r o v i d e v a l u e t o s c i e n c e by g u a r a n t e e i n g i t s c o n n e c t i o n reality —  has cannot,  to objective  to t r u t h , As I suggested above, l e g a l t h i n k i n g has based i t s c l a i m t o v a l u e  o b j e c t i v e l y e x i s t i n g r u l e s i n the same way on o b j e c t i v e l y e x i s t i n g f a c t s .  t h a t s c i e n c e was  s a i d t o be based  I n f a c t , t h i s c l a i m about the law would seem  t o have a f a r lower i n i t i a l p l a u s i b i l i t y t h a n the b e l i e f i n f a c t s .  Physical  f a c t s are c e r t a i n l y a much b e t t e r contender t o o b j e c t i v i t y t h a n a r e r u l e s or  on  14  principles.  The " r e a l i t y " of t h e l a t t e r tends t o be somehow i n f e r r e d by t h e i r  e f f e c t s , r a t h e r i n t h e same way a s we e x p e r i e n c e g r a v i t y or i n e r t i a a s opposed t o a p p l e s or t a b l e s .  But h a b i t s r u n deep and t h e b e l i e f i n t h e r e a l i t y of r u l e s  i s so d e e p l y imbedded i n our l e g a l c u l t u r e t h a t most p e o p l e would no more t h i n k to challenge  the e x i s t e n c e of r u l e s t h a n t h e y would t h a t o f c o n c r e t e f a c t s .  The  f i r s t s u s t a i n e d , a t t a c k on law's c l a i m t o v a l u e based upon t h e  o b j e c t i v i t y of r u l e s came from t h e s c h o o l o f l e g a l r e a l i s m .  T h i s group of  t h i n k e r s , many of whom were eminent j u d g e s , was t w i c e b l e s s e d w i t h l e g a l e x p e r i e n c e and an i n q u i s i t i v e a t t i t u d e untrammelled by overwhelming d e f e r e n c e to the p o s i t i v i s t d o c t r i n e . T r a d i t i o n a l jurisprudence  has c o n s i s t e n t l y m a i n t a i n e d t h a t t h e law  was o b j e c t i v e , and t h a t , i f d i f f e r e n t j u d g e s a p p l i e d t h e r u l e s c o r r e c t l y , they would always r e a c h the same c o n c l u s i o n .  Philosophers  had such a s t r o n g  attach-  ment t o t h i s b e l i e f , t h a t t h e y d i s m i s s e d  apparent counter-examples as mere  a b e r r a t i o n s , caused by t h e j u d g e a l l o w i n g h i s p e r s o n a l makeup t o contaminate h i s judgement.  T h i s meant t h a t t h e t h e o r y t h a t l a w i s a s e t of o b j e c t i v e r u l e s  was not c a p a b l e of b e i n g d i s p r o v e d .  The l e g a l r e a l i s t s r e c o g n i z e d  t h i s t o be a  v i o l a t i o n of t h e v e r y s c i e n t i f i c method t o w h i c h t h e p o s i t i v i s t s p u r p o r t e d t o adhere.  They knew from t h e i r own o b s e r v a t i o n  and e x p e r i e n c e t h a t t h e i n f l u e n c e  of j u d g e s ' p e r s o n a l i t i e s on l e g a l d e c i s i o n making was f a r t o o p r e v a l e n t t o be s i m p l y shrugged o f f .  They knew t h a t t h i s i n f l u e n c e c o n s t i t u t e d a f a l s i f i c a t i o n  of the t h e o r y t h a t l e g a l d e c i s i o n s a r e made by d i s c o v e r i n g and a p p l y i n g r u l e s . A c c o r d i n g l y , another t h e o r y was needed w h i c h c o u l d not o n l y e x p l a i n t h e e x i s t i n g body of l e g a l d e c i s i o n s , but would a l s o enable t h e t h e o r i s t t o make p r e d i c t i o n s about f u t u r e l e g a l d e c i s i o n s .  The t h e o r y c o u l d t h u s be c o n f i r m e d o r f a l s i f i e d  by t h e s u c c e s s of t h e p r e d i c t i o n s . jurisprudence  t h a t gave i t v a l u e  I t was t h i s e m p i r i c a l f e a t u r e of t h e r e a l i s t  i n t h e eyes of i t s exponents.  15  I n t e l l e c t u a l f a s h i o n once a g a i n i n t e r v e n e d adopted by the r e a l i s t s . l i n g s o c i a l s c i e n c e s was upon and  E m p i r i c a l b e h a v i o u r i s m and enjoying  and determined t h e  i t s i n f l u e n c e on the f l e d g -  the h e i g h t of i t s p o p u l a r i t y .  e a g e r l y a p p l i e d t o the s t u d y of l e g a l d e c i s i o n making.  the d e t e r m i n i n g  f a c t o r i n d e c i s i o n making i s the p e r s o n a l  j u d g e , t h e n i t i s h i s p s y c h o l o g i c a l and  course  I t was  seized  After a l l , i f  i n t e r v e n t i o n of  s o c i o l o g i c a l makeup t h a t should  con-  s t i t u t e the main s u b j e c t m a t t e r f o r an e m p i r i c a l ( i . e . , r a t i o n a l ) t h e o r y The  r e a l i s t s , w i t h t h e h u b r i s t y p i c a l of the s o c i a l  embarked upon the massive t a s k of d e v e l o p i n g  personality profiles. compilation.  data.  They drew  They conducted i n t e r v i e w s and drew up  But a l l t h e i r e f f o r t s were t o no  avail.  appeared suddenly amid much e n t h u s i a s m , but  enthusiasm waned and t h e r e s e a r c h done by i t s a d h e r e n t s d i d n o t h i n g  the  to r e k i n d l e  I t has reached such a low l e v e l of c r e d i b i l i t y i t o d a y t h a t many a  d e f e n d e r of the r e a l i t y of r u l e s w i l l d i s m i s s any as " o n l y " l e g a l r e a l i s m . passe f o r  Eager young  They compiled d a t a and argued about t h e o r i e s of d a t a  L e g a l r e a l i s m had  i t s flames.  law.  scientist,  legal professions.  g r a d u a t e s a p p l i e d themselves t o a s s e m b l i n g and d i s a s s e m b l i n g graphs and graphs and c h a r t s .  of  a t h e o r y based upon the s o c i o l o g i c a l  and p s y c h o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e of the j u d i c i a l and  c h a r t s and  the  And  challenge  t o t h e i r hegemony  we a l l know about l e g a l r e a l i s m .  I t has  been  year. The  s n e e r i n g d i s m i s s a l of the r e a l i s t s by modern j u r i s p r u d e n c e  s u r e l y an i n j u s t i c e . are p o w e r f u l and  is  Many of t h e i r i n i t i a l c r i t i c i s m s of the b e l i e f : i n r u l e s  convincing.  The  an i n v a l u a b l e a i d i n u n e a r t h i n g  t h o r o u g h g o i n g s c e p t i c i s m of t h e r e a l i s t s i s  many of the s e r i o u s problems and  i n v o l v e d i n the b e l i e f i n law's o b j e c t i v i t y .  anomalies  I t i s no doubt a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y  because of the embarrassing n a t u r e of many of t h e s e c r i t i c i s m s t h a t p o s i t i v i s t s a r e so eager t o r e l e g a t e e v e r y t h i n g  s a i d by t h e r e a l i s t s t o t h e s h e l f where we  s t o r e q u a i n t , but e s s e n t i a l l y u s e l e s s  antiques.  16  The  problem w i t h l e g a l r e a l i s m was  with i t s prescription.  The  s c r i p t i o n to behaviourism.  not w i t h i t s d i a g n o s i s , but  rather  r e a l i s t s ' major e r r o r l a y i n t h e i r w h o l e s a l e subT h i s paper i s not the p l a c e t o embark upon an  e x a m i n a t i o n of the many p h i l o s o p h i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h t h a t s c h o o l of thought i t has been done t h o r o u g h l y and  b e a u t i f u l l y by many o t h e r s . " ^  a r e e a s i l y a p p l i c a b l e t o the b e h a v i o u r i s t i t t o say t h a t , i n a p p l y i n g  These c r i t i c i s m s  f o u n d a t i o n s of l e g a l r e a l i s m .  The  i n d e p e n d e n t l y e x i s t i n g r u l e s were no l o n g e r  rather behavioural  rules.  Suffice  the e m p i r i c a l method of s c i e n c e , t h e l e g a l r e a l i s t s  m a i n t a i n e d t h e t r a d i t i o n of t r e a t i n g the law as something t h a t can be factually.  —  But, by g i v i n g the b e h a v i o u r a l  described  l e g a l r u l e s , but  r u l e s the  exclusive  p o s i t i o n of t r u t h , of r e a l i t y , t h e y shacked themselves t o t h e i r graphs and charts.  The  behaviour.  people i n v o l v e d i n the law v a n i s h e d t o be r e p l a c e d  by u n i t s of  Because of t h e i r o b s e s s i o n w i t h v e r i f i a b l e f a c t s , t h e y i g n o r e d  f a c t t h a t p e o p l e do b e l i e v e i n r u l e s . decisions.  Judges r e l y on r u l e s t o j u s t i f y t h e i r  P e o p l e r e l y on r u l e s t o govern t h e i r b e h a v i o u r .  r u l e s t o s t r u c t u r e t h e i r arguments.  the  Lawyers r e l y on  By r e f u s i n g t o acknowledge t h i s b e l i e f ,  l e g a l r e a l i s t s entrapped themselves i n a f a n t a s y  the  t h a t b o r e no r e l a t i o n s h i p t o  the law as i t i s a c t u a l l y e x p e r i e n c e d by most p e o p l e . The  r e a s o n t h a t l e g a l r e a l i s m so a l i e n a t e d i t s e l f  u n d e r s t o o d the n a t u r e of the b e l i e f i n r u l e s . an e m p i r i c a l h y p o t h e s i s . i s not j u s t an e x p l a n a t i o n of the law.  I t t r e a t e d t h i s b e l i e f as  simply  I n f a c t t h e b e l i e f i n the o b j e c t i v e e x i s t i n g of r u l e s or p r e d i c t i o n of l e g a l d e c i s i o n s , i t i s a j u s t i f i c a t i o n  When a j u d g e r e f e r s t o a r u l e , he i s not m e r e l y e x p l a i n i n g h i s d e c i -  s i o n , he i s g i v i n g ' i t a v a l u e . right, i t i s correct. valuable,  i s because i t m i s -  He  i s s a y i n g t h a t t h i s r u l e makes my  Because i t i s c o r r e c t , i t i s j u s t .  decision  T r u t h always i s  I t i s absurd t o t h i n k of a judge e x p l a i n i n g h i s d e c i s i o n on t h e  of an e m o t i o n a l trauma s u f f e r e d when he was  basis  t w e l v e , or because e i g h t y p e r c e n t of  17  j u d g e s w i t h s i m i l a r c u l t u r a l backgrounds would make t h a t d e c i s i o n .  Unless a  d e c i s i o n i s the r i g h t d e c i s i o n , t h e n i t i s not c a p a b l e of b e i n g a good d e c i s i o n and we have no r e a s o n t o r e s p e c t i t . The  r e a l i s t s had  p a i n t e d themselves i n t o a c o r n e r .  were c o r r e c t , t h e law had no v a l u e and was coercion.  If their  s i m p l y an i n s t r u m e n t of a r b i t r a r y  Y e t , i f the l e g a l spokesmen p e r s i s t e d i n d e s c r i b i n g the law's a c t i v i t y  as the d i s c o v e r y and a p p l i c a t i o n of p r e - e x i s t i n g r u l e s , t h e y would be i n myth making and t h e i r own  theories  highest  simply withered The  obfuscation ideal.  of t r u t h .  indulging  They would, t h a t i s , be a c t i n g  against  I n the f a c e of such a quandary, A m e r i c a n l e g a l r e a l i s m  away, w i t h o u t ever b e i n g a c t u a l l y r e f u t e d .  r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t the b e l i e f i n law's o b j e c t i v i t y as a s e t of r u l e s  i s an e v a l u a t i v e as w e l l as a d e s c r i p t i v e c l a i m , l e d J u d i t h S h k l a r t o i z e i t as an i d e o l o g y which she c a l l s "legalism"."'""'" an a t t i t u d e , or set of p r e f e r e n c e s ,  By i d e o l o g y  character-  she means m e r e l y  t h a t i s shared by p e o p l e i n a community.  Because i t i s s h a r e d , and n o r m a l l y v e r y d e e p l y imbedded, t h i s a t t i t u d e and b e l i e f s that i t e n t a i l s are normally for granted.  considered  s e l f - e v i d e n t and a r e s i m p l y  taken  Thus " l e g a l i s m " , t h e b e l i e f t h a t law, as a d i s c r e t e e n t i t y " o f  ascertainable r u l e s , i s i n f a c t a preference, of p r e - e x i s t i n g r u l e s . out r e g a r d i n g  the  a b e l i e f t h a t law should be a set  However, as the r e a l i s t s knew, and  as Feyerabend  points  s c i e n t i f i c t h e o r i e s , a d o p t i o n of an i d e o l o g y or a t h e o r y means  t h a t i t s fundamental b e l i e f s a r e not  subject to c r i t i c a l examination.  t h a t law i s v a l u a b l e because i t i s o b j e c t i v e i s u n c h a l l e n g e a b l e i s no competing i d e o l o g y , no a l t e r n a t i v e p r e f e r e n c e s t a n d i n g of the  The  belief  as l o n g as  there  on w h i c h t o ground an under-  law.  I should make i t c l e a r t h a t i t i s no p a r t of my  argument t o urge t h a t  we adopt an i d e o l o g i c a l l y "pure" p o s i t i o n from w h i c h t o s t u d y the law. b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s i s e i t h e r p o s s i b l e or d e s i r a b l e . t y p i c a l l y c o n c i s e and  a r t i c u l a t e manner:  I do  not  S h k l a r makes t h i s p o i n t i n her  18  ... i t may w e l l be doubted whether p o l i t i c a l t h e o r y , of w h i c h l e g a l t h e o r y i s a p a r t , can be w r i t t e n w i t h o u t some s o r t of i d e o l o g i c a l impetus. Nor i s t h e r e any r e a s o n t o f e e l t h a t t h e e x p r e s s i o n o f p e r s o n a l p r e f e r e n c e s i s an u n d e s i r a b l e f l a w . I t must seem so o n l y t o those who equate o b j e c t i v i t y w i t h remoteness from t h e i r own e x p e r i e n c e s , and e s p e c i a l l y from those they share w i t h t h e i r contemp o r a r i e s . However, i f one t h i n k s o f i d e o l o g y as m e r e l y a matter o f e m o t i o n a l r e a c t i o n s , b o t h n e g a t i v e and p o s i t i v e , t o d i r e c t s o c i a l e x p e r i e n c e s and t o t h e v i e w s o f o t h e r s , i t i s c l e a r t h a t i d e o l o g y i s as i n e v i t a b l e a s i t i s n e c e s s a r y i n g i v i n g any t h i n k i n g p e r s o n a:, sense of d i r e c t i o n . To be s u r e , i d e o l o g i c a l r e s p o n s e s a r e o f t e n d i f f i c u l t t o r e c o g n i z e i n o n e s e l f , a s t h e y i n s e n s i b l y come t o c o n d i t i o n one's i n t e r e s t s , one's methods of s t u d y , one's c o n c e p t u a l d e v i c e s , and even one's v o c a b u l a r y . However, i f we d i d n o t t h i n k of i d e o l o g y as a g r o s s form of i r r a t i o n a l i t y , we would be l e s s a n x i o u s t o r e p r e s s i t and our s e l f - a w a r e n e s s would be c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y g r e a t e r . 1 2 She s t a t e s her own i d e o l o g y , her  own o r d e r of p r e f e r e n c e s , t o be  one of "barebones l i b e r a l i s m , " t o i n c l u d e a p r i m a r y commitment t o s o c i a l t o l e r a n c e and d i v e r s i t y , t o c h e r i s h t h e freedom o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l and t h e subo r d i n a t i o n o f t h e S t a t e ' s power t o t h e s e v i r t u e s .  Throughout t h e remainder  of her book, S h k l a r shows how t h e a d o p t i o n of a l e g a l i s t i c v i e w o f l a w i n e v i t a b l y l e a d s t o t h e compromise of these i m p o r t a n t g o a l s .  I t i s i n t h e n a t u r e of r u l e s  t o homogenize t h e i r o b j e c t s , t o i g n o r e and t h u s devalue d i f f e r e n c e s , w h i l e exalting  similarities. Not o n l y a r e d i f f e r e n c e s between i n d i v i d u a l s frowned upon, but so a r e  the d i f f e r e n c e s between s i t u a t i o n s .  By c o n s t a n t l y s t r i v i n g t o t r e a t t h e p r e s e n t  and s t r u c t u r e t h e f u t u r e i n t h e same was a s we coped w i t h t h e p a s t ,  legalistic  law i n h i b i t s r a t h e r t h a n enhances t h e growth and development of t h e law.  Those  who i n s i s t on t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e v i e w t h a t t h e l a w i s a complete e v o l u t i o n a r y e n t i t y i n e v i t a b l y i g n o r e " t h e complex'and heterogeneous h i s t o r i c a l p r o c e s s combines r e a s o n a b l e  that  thought w i t h p e r s o n a l i d i o s y n c r a c i e s ; s o p h i s t i c a t e d p o l i 13  t i c a l programmes w i t h a n c i e n t and p e t r i f i e d means o f e x p r e s s i o n and thought". What i s t h e source o f t h i s i n s i s t e n c e on a v i e w t h a t has so many u n s a t i s f a c t o r y consequences, t h a t t u r n s a b l i n d eye t o so much common sense and h i s t o r i c a l experience? Shklar i d e n t i f i e s i t as the fear of a r b i t r a r i n e s s that  19  underlies  the e n t i r e growth of the w e s t e r n p o l i t i c a l t r a d i t i o n .  e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y endorsed the n o t i o n of the r u l e of law, i s assumed t o be n e c e s s a r i l y  the  t y r a n n y t h a t i n e v i t a b l y accompanies a r b i t r a r i n e s s , we immune from the w i l l of k i n g s and  of f r e e l y o r d e r i n g t h e i r l i v e s i n such a way i t must be c e r t a i n and  predictable.  The  whimsical.  judges.  have  because the r u l e of  men  that are  a r b i t r a r y and  We  In order to stave o f f have d e v e l o p e d laws  I f p e o p l e a r e t o be  as to a v o i d c o n f l i c t w i t h the  l i k e l i h o o d of t y r a n n y and  w i t h the amount of d i s c r e t i o n i t s o f f i c i a l s are a b l e to e x e r c i s e .  i s bad,  so o b j e c t i v i t y must be good.  objective.  Arbitrariness  law,  oppression  i n c r e a s e s i n v e r s e l y w i t h the c e r t a i n t y of the law's a p p l i c a t i o n , and  o b j e c t i v i t y leads to a r b i t r a r i n e s s .  capable  directly  L a c k of  leads to tyranny.  Tyranny  I n o r d e r t o be good, law must  be  Q.E.D. The  problem i s , the b e l i e f i n law's o b j e c t i v i t y does not  i t s uncertainty,  eliminate  i t m e r e l y i g n o r e s i t . T h i s i s the theme of Steve W e x l e r ' s 14  a r t i c l e "Discretion:  The  Unacknowledged S i d e of Law".  v a s t m a j o r i t y of l e g a l d e c i s i o n s made t o d a y a r e not unambiguous r u l e s , but  are r a t h e r  p e r s o n a l f e e l i n g s , b e l i e f s and to decide either  u b i q u i t o u s i n the f u n c t i o n i n g any  c o n t a c t w i t h what we  But  the  the r e s u l t of c l e a r  and  the r e s u l t of some o f f i c i a l a p p l y i n g  p r e f e r e n c e s to a case w h i c h he has  the absence of c l e a r and  discretion  binding rules, i s  euphemistically  c a l l administrative  law.  has  But  relevance to t h e i r general  law. even i n the c o u r t s ,  a c c o r d i n g to Wexler as t o the l e g a l r e a l i s t s ,  the judge i s o n l y r a r e l y bound by a r u l e w h i c h compels one The  the  his  of b u r e a u c r a c i e s i s w e l l known t o anyone who  l e g a l t h e o r i s t s c o n t i n u e t o deny to t h i s f a c t any v i e w of the  shows t h a t  way.  That d i s c r e t i o n , and  had  He  judge's job  i s to "discover"  the a p p l i c a b l e  particular  decision.  r u l e f o r the case b e f o r e  him.  20  But t h i s always i n v o l v e s c h o o s i n g the r e l e v a n t f e a t u r e s of t h e s i t u a t i o n b e f o r e him, as w e l l as t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of b o t h s t a t u t e s and p r e v i o u s j u d i c i a l decisions.  The j u d g e i s no more c a p a b l e of p e r f o r m i n g t h i s c h o o s i n g  and  i n t e r p r e t i n g u n a f f e c t e d by h i s own v a l u e s , b e l i e f s and p r e j u d i c e s t h a n i s the s c i e n t i s t who  i s " t e s t i n g " a theory.  V a l u e s , b e l i e f s , and p r e j u d i c e s , e s s e n t i a l  t o a l l human d e c i s i o n s , a r e not o b j e c t i v e , not c e r t a i n , and a r e not c a p a b l e of b e i n g c a p t u r e d or e l i m i n a t e d by a r u l e , or by a methodology. But by t a l k i n g and a c t i n g a s though the law i s o b j e c t i v e , we end p a y i n g an enormous p r i c e .  up  I t i s n o t m e r e l y t h a t we a l i e n a t e t h e law from i t s  h i s t o r i c a l and c u l t u r a l c o n t e x t , w h i c h i s indeed s e r i o u s , but somehow t h e o r e t i c a l and amorphous.  The r e a l t r a g e d y i s t h a t we a l l o w our d e c i s i o n makers t o proceed  w i t h o u t b e i n g honest and r e s p o n s i b l e t o t h e people a f f e c t e d by t h e i r c h o i c e s . A judge o r a b u r e a u c r a t i n e v i t a b l y makes h i s d e c i s i o n on t h e b a s i s of h i s p e r s o n a l v a l u e s and d e s i r e s , be above board about t h i s .  But he i s not r e q u i r e d , indeed he i s f o r b i d d e n , t o He must not s t a t e h i s r e a l r e a s o n s nor f r a n k l y o u t -  l i n e t h e v a l u e s upon w h i c h he r e l i e s . o b j e c t i v i t y and r u l e s .  I n s t e a d he must h i d e b e h i n d the c l o a k of  D i s c u s s i o n and e v a l u a t i o n of the v a l u e s i n v o l v e d a r e  n o r m a l l y p r e c l u d e d by t h e mass of what i s too o f t e n t a n g l e d and  impenetrable  "reasoning". Furthermore,  the myth t h a t judges s i m p l y d i s c o v e r and a p p l y p r e -  e x i s t i n g r u l e s l e a d s us t o v a l u e too h i g h l y t h e wrong q u a l i t i e s i n the t h a t we a p p o i n t t o bench and  people  bar.  Impersonal judgement and the s t r i v i n g f o r o b j e c t i v i t y a r e i n t e l l e c t u a l v i r t u e s of t h e h i g h e s t o r d e r . But they a r e t h e v i r t u e s of o b s e r v e r s , of t e c h n i c i a n s , and of s t r a t e g i s t s , n o t of t h o s e how must make s o c i a l c h o i c e s f o r themselves and f o r o t h e r s i n s i t u a t i o n s where i t i s f a r from c l e a r what ends can and s h o u l d be pursued, however much t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s may l o n g f o r c l e a r r u l e b o o k s to g u i d e them.15 ... we a l l o w hack o f f i c i a l s t o d e c i d e cases w h i c h even t h e most s e n s i t i v e among us would f i n d v e r y d i f f i c u l t t o d e c i d e . We p r e t e n d or b e l i e v e t h a t r u l e s a r e a t work when i t i s men who a r e , and we do not demand t h a t the men be our b e s t or t h a t t h e y answer f o r t h e i r d e c i s i o n s .  21  Perhaps most t r a g i c i s the p l a i n , simple f a c t t h a t , i n c r e a s i n g l y , no one  i s f o o l e d anymore.  Lawyers, law s t u d e n t s , policemen.,  show t h e i r w o r l d l i n e s s and objective.  and  even some j u d g e s  s o p h i s t i c a t i o n by s c o f f i n g a t the i d e a t h a t law i s  They a l l know t h a t " i t a l l depends on w h i c h j u d g e you g e t " .  The  pronouncements of the p r o f e s s o r s and t h e a s s u r a n c e s of t h e j u d g e s t h a t the law i s j u s t because i t i s o b j e c t i v e , t h a t one can l e a r n " l e g a l r e a s o n i n g " and  see t h a t ,  d e s p i t e i t s appearances, the law r e a l l y JLS_ r a t i o n a l , a l l of t h e s e f a l l on deaf ear s. Arguments can be made, and no doubt w i l l be, t h a t t h o s e who  deny t h a t  the law i s o b j e c t i v e s i m p l y don't u n d e r s t a n d , t h a t t h e i r v i e w of the law i s shallow.  But i t i s too l a t e f o r t h a t .  The  c h o i c e i s not between r u l e s and  d i s c r e t i o n , but "between the p r e t e n s e of r u l e s , and the r e a l i t y of d i s c r e t i o n " . ' ' ' ^ And  w h i l e our p h i l o s o p h e r s and our j u d g e s and our t e a c h e r s postpone t h i s  d e c i s i o n and m a i n t a i n and w i d e r .  The  t h e i r facade,  t h e gap between law and j u s t i c e yawns w i d e r  " f i d e l i t y t o law" appears i n c r e a s i n g l y n a i v e .  law, the b a s i s of our commitment t o i t , has How  t h a t t h e law i s not  They do not t e l l us what t o do w i t h  this  I have argued t h a t the law seeks t o be o b j e c t i v e i n o r d e r t h a t i t  be r a t i o n a l ; r a t i o n a l i n o r d e r t o be v a l u a b l e . equation.  of  N e i t h e r S h k l a r nor Wexler  o f f e r us any more d e f i n i t e p r e s c r i p t i o n t h a n t o r e c o g n i z e  recognition.  the value  evaporated.  can the law cope w i t h t h i s c r i s i s ?  m e r e l y a s e t of o b j e c t i v e r u l e s .  And  Perhaps the problem i s w i t h  I s i t r e a l l y n e c e s s a r y t h a t t h e law be o b j e c t i v e i n order t o  this  be  valuable? As I p o i n t e d out, s c i e n c e once thought t h a t , i n order f o r ±t_ t o v a l u a b l e , i t had  t o be based upon o b j e c t i v e f a c t s .  s c i e n c e i s not o b j e c t i v e :  t h e r e a r e no f a c t s .  Now  be  i t has been r e a l i z e d t h a t  T h i s r e a l i z a t i o n has not l e d  anyone t o deny the v a l u e of s c i e n c e ; people have m e r e l y sought a new  basis for  22  i t s value.  T h i s has been t h e m o t i v a t i o n f o r t h e h i s t o r i c a l work of such  i n d i v i d u a l s as P a u l K. Feyerabend and A r t h u r  Koestler.  They have i d e n t i f i e d a p a t t e r n t h a t seems t o accompany a l l e v o l u t i o n a r y growth, whether i t be of s p e c i e s o r o f i d e a s . ... a new p e r i o d i n t h e h i s t o r y o f s c i e n c e commences w i t h a backward movement t h a t r e t u r n s us t o an e a r l i e r s t a g e where t h e o r i e s were more vague and had s m a l l e r e m p i r i c a l c o n t e n t . T h i s backward movement i s not j.ust an a c c i d e n t . I t has a d e f i n i t e f u n c t i o n ; i t i s e s s e n t i a l i f we want t o o v e r t a k e t h e s t a t u s quo ...18 £emphasis added] K o e s t l e r i d e n t i f i e s t h i s backward movement as a r e c u l e r pour mieux s a u t e r : drawing back t o l e a p .  a  I t may be u s e f u l a t t h i s p o i n t t o draw back i n our  i n t e l l e c t u a l h i s t o r y t o make a new s t a r t . embryonic s t a g e of Western p h i l o s o p h y  —  We s h o u l d attempt t o r e t u r n t o t h e t o t h e t h i n k e r s of a n c i e n t Greece.  23  —  CHAPTER TWO **  i  —  AA  There i s no doubt t h a t a n c i e n t Greece has had a p o w e r f u l i n f l u e n c e on subsequent Western w o r l d v i e w s . properly appreciated.  Many s c h o l a r s d e s c r i b e t h e accomplishment o f t h e Greek  t h i n k e r s i n terms of a b s t r a c t i o n . a c c o u n t s , man a c q u i r e d universe,  The f u l l n a t u r e of t h i s impact i s not  For the f i r s t time, according  t o these  t h e a b i l i t y t o conduct h i s r a t i o n a l i t y i n an a b s t r a c t  s e p a r a t e from t h e w o r l d  of mere s e n s a t i o n .  This permitted the  development of a b s t r a c t mathematics, E u c l i d i a n geometry, and f o r m a l l o g i c .  It  r e s u l t e d i n t h e development o f a p r e c i s e and e l a b o r a t e astronomy and p h y s i c s . Now, j u s t as t h e groundwork f o r t h e s e d i s c i p l i n e s c a n be t r a c e d t o t h e newly found Greek a b i l i t y t o a b s t r a c t from everyday e x p e r i e n c e , Western l e g a l systems f i n d t h e i r common r o o t i n t h e H e l l e n i c  so t o o c a n  genius.  ... P r o f e s s o r F.S.C. N o r t h r o p ... has shown t h a t t h e c r e a t i o n of the Western c o n t r a c t u a l l e g a l s c i e n c e was t h e r e s u l t o f t h e Roman S t o i c l a w y e r s ' i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e e p i s t o m o l o g y , l o g i c , and i m a g e l e s s t h e o r e t i c a l forms of Greek p h y s i c s i n t o t h e i r ' l e g a l system, p r o d u c i n g t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y change i n Roman law d e s c r i b e d by S i r Henry Maine as t h e s h i f t from S t a t u s t o C o n t r a c t . 1 An u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e change i n w o r l d v i e w t h a t o c c u r r e d  twenty-  f i v e c e n t u r i e s ago on t h e s h o r e s of t h e M e d i t e r r a n e a n cannot h e l p but e n l i g h t e n us about t h e b e l i e f s and dogmas t h a t u n d e r l i e our own w o r l d v i e w , and p a r t i c u l a r l y our l e g a l s t r u c t u r e . The  change t h a t evolved  i n t h e t h i n k i n g o f t h e Greeks was more  fundamental t h a n t h e " a c q u i s i t i o n " of t h e power t o t h i n k i n an a b s t r a c t or u n i v e r s a l way.  I n f a c t , i t seems more p l a u s i b l e t o suppose t h a t t h e a c t u a l  c a p a c i t y t o t h i n k a b s t r a c t l y d i d not d e v e l o p i n t h e span of a few hundred  years,  but had e x i s t e d f o r as l o n g as homo s a p i e n s had walked t h e s u r f a c e of t h e e a r t h .  24  I n s t e a d , t h e Greeks i n v e n t e d  a particular  never b e f o r e been performed.  s t y l e of a b s t r a c t thought t h a t had  But b e f o r e t h i s change i n s t y l e c o u l d o c c u r , a  r a d i c a l change of w o r l d v i e w was n e c e s s a r y , a change t h a t went t o t h e v e r y of r a t i o n a l i t y i t s e l f . philosophy  core  And i t was t h i s change t h a t i s t h e r e a l l e g a c y of t h e  of a n c i e n t Greece.  More p r e c i s e l y , i t i s t h i s change t h a t i s t h e  l e g a c y of t h e l a t e r Greek p h i l o s o p h e r s ,  e s p e c i a l l y P l a t o and A r i s t o t l e .  For t h e f i r s t time i n p h i l o s o p h y ,  t h e s e two men made t h e t r u e r a t h e r  t h a n t h e good, t h e u l t i m a t e c r i t e r i o n of r a t i o n a l i t y . has haunted our r a t i o n a l i t y  ever  since,  I t i s t h i s change w h i c h  I t was. t h i s change t h a t l e d t o t h e t y p  of a b s t r a c t t h i n k i n g t h a t we c a l l " o b j e c t i v e " .  I t was t h i s change t h a t made  s c i e n c e and h e r s i s t e r t e c h n o l o g y p o s s i b l e , t h a t l e d t o t h e d i s c o v e r y of t h e c u r e f o r s m a l l p o x and t o t h e i n v e n t i o n of napalm.  I t was t h i s change t h a t b o t h  determined t h e form of C h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e , and p r o v i d e d t h e b a s i s f o r n a t i o n a l socialism. Because of t h e n o t i o n t h a t t h e t r u e r e a l l y i s t h e H o l y G r a i l a f t e r w h i c h a l l of our r a t i o n a l q u e s t s a r e d i r e c t e d , i t i s d i f f i c u l t f o r us t o imagine that t h i s i s not inherent  i n t h e v e r y concept o f r a t i o n a l i t y .  This  difficulty  i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g , f o r t h e b e l i e f l i e s b e h i n d , or u n d e r , a l l o f our o t h e r It i s the foundation  of our r a t i o n a l l i v e s .  r a t i o n a l i t y , perhaps t o our s a n i t y .  A t h r e a t t o i t i s a t h r e a t t o our  But s u r e l y any t r u e c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h a  w o r l d v i e w w i l l e n t a i l t h i s s o r t of t h r e a t . r e a l l y attempting  belief  I f i t d o e s n ' t , t h e n we a r e n o t  t o understand t h e w o r l d v i e w i n q u e s t i o n , but m e r e l y t o  embrace i t and a s s i m i l a t e i t w i t h i n t h e f o l d s o f our own. What i s needed t h e n , i s a sense of i m a g i n a t i o n , d i s b e l i e f , and a f e e l i n g o f a d v e n t u r e . almost always e x c i t i n g . crossing.  Crossing f r o n t i e r s  an openness t o suspend i s never easy, b u t i s  Every f r o n t i e r r e q u i r e s a v e h i c l e t o f a c i l i t a t e the  The v e h i c l e t h a t I have d i s c o v e r e d  f o r t h e e x p l o r a t i o n of t h e founda-  t i o n s of r a t i o n a l i t y i s t h e c o n f l i c t between l o g i c and r h e t o r i c .  This i s  25  e s p e c i a l l y u s e f u l when we c o n s i d e r t h e p h i l o s o p h y of a n c i e n t Greece, f o r i t was h e r e t h a t t h i s b a t t l e was  f i r s t fought.  In t h i s c h a p t e r , I w i l l examine t h e r o l e  t h a t r h e t o r i c a l t h i n k i n g p l a y e d i n p r e - S o c r a t i c p h i l o s o p h y , and the n a t u r e of the a t t a c k t h a t was t h i s determined suggest how  l e v e l l e d a g a i n s t i t by S o c r a t e s and P l a t o .  the treatment w h i c h was  g i v e n t o r h e t o r i c by A r i s t o t l e ,  t h i s has i n f l u e n c e d Western r a t i o n a l i t y ever s i n c e .  where h i s t o r i e s of p h i l o s o p h y i n e v i t a b l y s t a r t — walked i n t o a w e l l w h i l e l o o k i n g a t t h e  **  The  how  and  I will  start  w i t h T h a l e s of M i l e t u s , who  stars.  i i **  s i x t h c e n t u r y b e f o r e t h e b i r t h of J e s u s C h r i s t was  most remarkable  I w i l l , show  epochs i n the s h o r t h i s t o r y of our s p e c i e s .  one of the  I t produced  the  Buddha i n I n d i a , C o n f u c i u s and Lao-Tzu i n C h i n a , Z a r a t h u s t r a i n P e r s i a , and I o n i a n s and Pythagoras  i n the M e d i t e r r a n e a n .  the f a c t that the s p i r i t  Perhaps even more remarkable  the is  of d i s c o v e r y i n a l l of t h e s e f a r d i s t a n t l a n d s was  so  similar. The c i t y of M i l e t u s was  i n I o n i a , w h i c h we now  h e r e t h a t t h e f i r s t Greek p h i l o s o p h e r s l i v e d and d i e d .  c a l l Turkey. And  i t was  here that  T h a l e s proposed t h e fundamental substance o f t h e u n i v e r s e t o be water. preposterous own  c l a i m cannot be c o n s i d e r e d i n the same way  not t h e g o a l .  This  t h a t we e n t e r t a i n our  a s s e r t i o n s . For T h a l e s , as f o r a l l of t h e p h i l o s o p h e r s t h a t we  i n the next few pages, t r u t h was  I t was  N e i t h e r was  s h a l l consider  t h e r e the s e p a r a t i o n  between the w o r l d s of r e l i g i o n and of knowledge t h a t we a r e so f a m i l i a r w i t h today.  T h a l e s was  a p h i l o s o p h e r and not m e r e l y :another r e l i g i o u s prophet  o r a c l e , because he d e s c r i b e d the f r u i t s of h i s own  r e f l e c t i o n s and h i s  or  own  e x p e r i e n c e , and not a b e l i e f about the u n i v e r s e based upon communication w i t h t h e gods.  But h i s d e s c r i p t i o n of the u n i v e r s e was  c e r t a i n l y t i e d t o what we would  26  call religious belief.  The water t h a t formed  not a s i m p l e o b j e c t i n t h e w o r l d .  I t was d i v i n e w a t e r , i t was ensouled and  communicated i t s l i f e t o a l l m a t t e r . l i f e was t h e source o f a l l m o t i o n .  t h e b a s i s o f a l l e x i s t e n c e was  The u n i v e r s e was a l i v e f o r T h a l e s and t h i s Man was b u t a p a r t o f t h i s d i v i n e motion.  Behind a l l of t h e apparent d i s t i n c t i o n s , was t h e u n i t y of t h e l i v i n g  water.  The b e l i e f i n a p r i m a r y substance t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e d t h e u n i t y of a l l t h i n g s was h e l d i n common by a l l of t h e p r e - S o c r a t i c t h i n k e r s .  But, as i n  the E a s t , where the same b e l i e f was f i r m l y e n t r e n c h e d , p h i l o s o p h e r s came up w i t h d i f f e r e n t ways of t r y i n g t o communicate the i n e f f a b l e .  No d e s c r i p t i o n o f  the u n i v e r s e can be c o m p l e t e , f o r language i s based on d i s t i n c t i o n s , and t h e b a s i s of t h e u n i v e r s e i s t h e One — not d i c t a t e s i l e n c e .  t h e absence of d i s t i n c t i o n s .  I t i s human n a t u r e t o communicate.  But t h a t does  Therefore d i f f e r e n t  people came up w i t h d i f f e r e n t d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e One, d e s c r i p t i o n s t h a t enabled o t h e r s t o e x p e r i e n c e t h e i r w o r l d i n new and r i c h e r ways. a l l shared something. of  t h e observed.  But t h e s e d e s c r i p t i o n s  They always i n c l u d e d t h e o b s e r v e r as an i n d i s p e n s i b l e p a r t  Humanity p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e e x p e r i e n c e s t h a t i t had, and so  human q u a l i t i e s p l a y e d a d e t e r m i n i n g p a r t i n t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e w o r l d . T h i s i s e s p e c i a l l y e v i d e n t i n t h e t h i n k i n g of Anaximander, another M i l e s i a n and a younger contemporary  of T h a l e s .  p r i n c i p l e i s t h e unbounded o r i n d e f i n i t e .  F o r Anaximander t h e fundamental  The unbounded i s i n t e r n a l l y u n d i f f e r -  e n t i a t e d , but i s t h e s o u r c e o f a l l appearances.  O p p o s i t e s s e p a r a t e themselves  out from t h e One and t h e n war upon each o t h e r .  There i s a c o n t i n u o u s c y c l e of  becoming and c e a s i n g t o be a s t h e o p p o s i t e s i n t r u d e upon each o t h e r , and t h e n are  f o r c e d t o pay r e t r i b u t i o n i n accordance w i t h t h e p r i n c i p l e of cosmic  justice  2 ( d i k e ) . T h i s concept o f j u s t i c e a s t h e r e g u l a t i n g p r i n c i p l e of t h e u n i v e r s e i s a v i t a l p a r t of the p r e - S o c r a t i c thought.  I n t h e way t h a t i t b i n d s gods a s w e l l  as men, i t i s s t r o n g l y s u g g e s t i v e of t h e E a s t e r n c o n c e p t s o f Karma o r Tao. I t  27  invokes a dramatic  p o r t r a y a l of t h e u n i v e r s e —  a q u a l i t a t i v e and m o r a l under-  s t a n d i n g of e m p i r i c a l phenomena t h a t i s q u i t e f o r e i g n t o our s c i e n t i f i c manner of t h i n k i n g . world  But once we adopt the v i e w t h a t the n a t u r e of the  perceived  i s the r e s u l t of the p a r t i c i p a t i n g s u b j e c t , i t becomes i n e v i t a b l e t h a t  m o r a l c o n c e p t s w i l l p l a y an e s s e n t i a l r o l e i n the d e s c r i p t i o n of t h a t The human p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the u n i v e r s e was who  a l s o s t r e s s e d by Anaximenes,  d e s c r i b e d the fundamental substance as a i r o r , more a c c u r a t e l y , as  or s p i r i t  (pneuma).  homogeneous b r e a t h .  world.  breath  A l l o b j e c t s a r e t h i c k e n i n g s or t h i n n i n g s of t h i s p r i m o r d i a l , T h i s substance i s a l i v e or ensouled and  i t s l i f e causes  a l l change and m o t i o n . I must r e p e a t my  c o n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e s e e x p l a n a t i o n s of the  universe  were not a t t e m p t s at c o n s t r u c t i n g s c i e n t i f i c t h e o r i e s i n the sense of a s e t of true propositions.  I t i s probably  b e t t e r t o t h i n k of them as a c t i v i t i e s t h a t  resemble p a i n t i n g or w r i t i n g p o e t r y . or way  of e x p e r i e n c i n g  t r u e or f a c t u a l . of A r t h u r  the w o r l d  T h i s may  They were a t t e m p t s t o share an  t h a t was  experience,  p l e a s i n g or f u l f i l l i n g , r a t h e r t h a n  h e l p us t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e f o l l o w i n g o b s e r v a t i o n  Koestler: None of the c o s m o l o g i e s ... gained a c o n s i d e r a b l e f o l l o w i n g . Every p h i l o s o p h e r of the p e r i o d seems t o have had h i s own t h e o r y r e g a r d i n g t h e n a t u r e of the U n i v e r s e around him. To quote P r o f e s s o r B u r n e t , "no sooner d i d an I o n i a n p h l o s o p h e r l e a r n h a l f a dozen g e o m e t r i c a l p r o p o s i t i o n s and hear t h a t the phenomena of the heavens r e c u r i n c y c l e s t h a n h e ' s e t t o work t o l o o k f o r law e v e r y where i n n a t u r e , and w i t h an a u d a c i t y amounting t o h y b r i s t o c o n s t r u c t a system of t h e u n i v e r s e . " 3  S u r e l y t h i s image i s more e v o c a t i v e of a group of f l e d g l i n g a r t i s t s a l l t r y i n g t o p a i n t the b e s t p i c t u r e , t h a n a group of draughtsmen t r y i n g t o r e p l i c a t e the t r u e s t a t e of a f f a i r s . The most complete example of how  cosmic wonder, a e s t h e t i c d e l i g h t and  t h e e x e r c i s e of r e a s o n a r e i n e x t r i c a b l y t i e d t o g e t h e r a t t h i s time was d o c t r i n e of the P y t h a g o r e a n b r o t h e r h o o d .  the  P y t h a g o r a s of Samos i s u n i v e r s a l l y  28  recognized  as the f a t h e r of Western mathematics.  p e r s i s t s i n a t t e m p t s t o e x p l a i n the u n i v e r s e  I t i s h i s influence that  i n terms of mathematics.  There  a r e , however, e s s e n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s between the r e l a t i o n of numbers t o r e a l i t y f o r Pythagoras^ and  f o r more r e c e n t  thinkers.  P y t h a g o r a s , i t ' s e e m s , b e l i e v e d i n the same cosmic u n i t y t h a t described  i n v a r i o u s ways by t h e M i l e s i a n s ,  He a l s o b e l i e v e d t h a t the  was  i n a c o n t i n u o u s s t a t e of f l u x .  was  not w a t e r , or b r e a t h , or the c o m b i n a t i o n of o p p o s i t e s .  t h a t the s t u d y of numbers was  But the u n i f y i n g v i s i o n t h a t he  t h e way  was universe  proclaimed  Pythagoras b e l i e v e d  to u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e u n i v e r s e .  Once  a g a i n , we must be c a r e f u l not t o t h i n k t h a t the g o a l of Pyghagoras' t h i n k i n g was  knowledge.  Mathematics was  of t h e u n i v e r s e .  not a method f o r c o n s t r u c t i n g t r u e d e s c r i p t i o n s  Rather i t was  a d i s c i p l i n e t h a t enabled an adept t o have a  m y s t i c a l i n s i g h t i n t o the cosmos. I t may  be e a s i e r t o a p p r e c i a t e  t h e n a t u r e of the P y t h a g o r e a n v i s i o n 4  i f we c o n s i d e r The  i t s r e l i g i o u s roots.  O r p h i c r e l i g i o n had  I t displayed a powerful Orphic  sought e c s t a t i c r e l e a s e from the w o r l d  r i t u a l s of dance, d r i n k i n g and  other  taught t h a t i n t e l l e c t u a l e c s t a s y  sensual pleasures.  Now,  through  d e r i v e d from t h i s P y t h a g o r e a n i d e a .  intense  Pythagoras  ( e k s t a s i s ) c o u l d be a t t a i n e d by  of the " d i v i n e dance of numbers".  influence.  contemplation  I n f a c t , the modern word, " t h e o r y "  is  But r a t h e r t h a n the c o l d l y o b j e c t i v e conno-  t a t i o n s t h a t i t b e a r s today, t o t h e Greeks of t h a t t i m e i t meant something q u i t e different: beholding  "passionate,  sympathetic c o n t e m p l a t i o n " .  I t was  t h e k i n d of  c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a s p e c t a t o r a t a r e l i g i o u s f e s t i v a l . For P y t h a g o r a s , t h e " p a s s i o n a t e s y m p a t h e t i c c o n t e m p l a t i o n " was i n t e l l e c t u a l , and i s s u e d i n m a t h e m a t i c a l knowledge. I n t h i s way, through P y t h a g o r e a n i s m , " t h e o r y " g r a d u a l l y a c q u i r e d i t s modern meaning; but f o r a l l who were i n s p i r e d by P y t h a g o r a s i t r e t a i n e d an element of e c s t a t i c r e v e l a t i o n . To t h o s e who have r e l u c t a n t l y l e a r n t a l i t t l e mathematics i n s c h o o l t h i s may seem s t r a n g e ; but  29  t o those who have e x p e r i e n c e d t h e i n t o x i c a t i n g d e l i g h t of sudden u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t mathematics g i v e s , from time t o t i m e , t o t h o s e who l o v e i t , the P y t h a g o r e a n v i e w w i l l seem, c o m p l e t e l y n a t u r a l even i f u n t r u e . I t might seem t h a t the e m p i r i c a l p h i l o s o p h e r i s the s l a v e of h i s m a t e r i a l , but t h a t t h e pure m a t h e m a t i c i a n , l i k e t h e m u s i c i a n , i s a f r e e c r e a t o r of h i s w o r l d of ordered beauty.5 [emphasis addedj Through the p a s s i o n a t e c o n t e m p l a t i o n of t h e r e l a t i o n of numbers t o the appearances of the w o r l d , t h r o u g h t h e p u r s u i t of the b a l a n c e and  order  (armonia) of the u n i v e r s e as d i s p l a y e d by t h e r e l a t i o n s between numbers, p u r i f i c a t i o n ( k a t h a r s i s ) was  o b t a i n e d and t h e i n d i v i d u a l c o u l d then escape from the  wheel of r e b i r t h .  s t u d y of numbers, t h e n , was  The  f o r Pythagoras  what t h e  p r a c t i c e of yoga, or the a c t i v i t y of m e d i t a t i o n , or the s o l v i n g of Koans were for h i s Eastern contemporaries.  I t was  t h e method t o r e a l i z e t h e  illusory  n a t u r e of the w o r l d of t h i n g s , and a method f o r l o o s i n g o n e s e l f from i t s bonds. The c l a i m s about numbers were not statements involvement  w i t h r e a l i t y , of c o n t r o l over  of f a c t , but methods of p e r s o n a l  experience.  the Pythagoreans ... were aware t h a t the symbols of mythology and the symbols of m a t h e m a t i c a l s c i e n c e were d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s of t h e same, i n d i v i s i b l e R e a l i t y . They d i d not l i v e i n a ' d i v i d e d house of f a i t h and Reason'; t h e two were i n t e r l o c k i n g l i k e t h e ground p l a n and e l e v a t i o n on an a r c h i t e c t ' s d r a w i n g . I t i s a s t a t e of mind v e r y d i f f i c u l t f o r t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y man t o imagine — or even t o b e l i e v e t h a t i t c o u l d have e x i s t e d . I t may h e l p t o remember though, t h a t some of the g r e a t e s t p r e - S o c r a t i c sages f o r m u l a t e d t h e i r p h i l o s o p h i e s i n v e r s e ; t h e u n i t a r y source of i n s p i r a t i o n of p r o p h e t , poet, and p h i l o s o p h e r was s t i l l t a k e n f o r granted.6 The major impact of t h e Pythagorean p h i l o s o p h y , a l o n g w i t h t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of mathematics t o the d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e u n i v e r s e , was  the  method of d e d u c t i v e r e a s o n i n g t h a t i t i n t r o d u c e d t o a l l a s p e c t s of p h i l o s o phical speculation.  I t must be kept i n mind, however, t h a t the Pythagoreans  saw d e d u c t i o n as a means of g a i n i n g e c s t a s y , as a m y s t i c a l d i s c i p l i n e t h a t brought them i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h t h e u l t i m a t e r e a l i t y and t h e r e b y l i b e r a t e d them from day-to-day appearances. than s c i e n t i f i c .  I t s a p p e a l was a e s t h e t i c and s p i r i t u a l r a t h e r  Those s c h o l a r s who  suggest t h a t t h e Pythagoreans founded t h e  30  d e d u c t i v e method as an avenue t o t h e t r u t h , a l a Rene D e s c a r t e s , d i s t o r t  the  r e l a t i o n t h a t the Pythagoreans themselves saw between t h e i r t h o u g h t s and  their  worId. One d o c t r i n e s was  of the most i n f l u e n t i a l of the l a t e r f o l l o w e r s of t h e P y t h a g o r e a n Heraclitus.  s t a t e of flux.. M i l e s i a n s who  he taught t h a t e v e r y t h i n g i s i n a  For him the fundamental substance i s f i r e .  But as w i t h  the  preceded him, t h i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n should be thought of as meta-  p h o r i c a l or p o e t i c . opposites.  L i k e Pythagoras,  He s t a t e s t h a t the u n i t y i n the w o r l d i s a u n i t y of  The dynamic p r i n c i p l e  of the u n i v e r s e i s s t r i f e .  H i s b e l i e f i n s t r i f e i s connected w i t h t h i s t h e o r y of o p p o s i t e s , f o r i n s t r i f e o p p o s i t e s combine t o produce a m o t i o n w h i c h i s a harmony. There i s a u n i t y i n the w o r l d , but i t i s a u n i t y r e s u l t i n g from d i v e r s i t y : "Couples a r e t h i n g s whole and t h i n g s not whole, what i s drawn t o g e t h e r and what i s drawn asunder, the harmonious and the d i s c o r d a n t . The One i s made up of a l l t h i n g s and a l l t h i n g s i s s u e from the One." 1 The  r e m a r k a b l e s i m i l a r i t y between the t e a c h i n g s of H e r a c l i t u s and  those of the C h i n e s e p h i l o s o p h y of Taoism has been p o i n t e d out by F r i t j o f Capra: I t i s amazing t h a t , a t t h e same t i m e when Lao Tzu and h i s f o l l o w e r s developed t h e i r w o r l d v i e w , t h e e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e s of t h i s T a o i s t v i e w were taught a l s o i n Greece, by a man whose t e a c h i n g s a r e known to us o n l y i n fragments and who was, and s t i l l i s , v e r y o f t e n m i s u n d e r s t o o d . T h i s Greek " T a o i s t " was H e r a c l i t u s of Ephesus. He shared w i t h Lao Tzu not o n l y t h e emphasis on c o n t i n u o u s change, which he expressed i n h i s famous s a y i n g " E v e r y t h i n g f l o w s " , but a l s o the n o t i o n t h a t a l l changes a r e c y c l i c . He compared the w o r l d o r d e r t o "an e v e r - l i v i n g f i r e , k i n d l i n g i n measures and g o i n g out i n measures," an image w h i c h i s indeed v e r y s i m i l a r t o t h e C h i n e s e i d e a of the Tao m a n i f e s t i n g i t s e l f i n the c y c l i c i n t e r p l a y of Y i n and Yang.^ The  t e a c h i n g s of Parmenides of E l e a a r e o f t e n supposed t o be i n  c o n f l i c t w i t h those of H e r a c l i t u s ,  T h i s i s because Parmenides and  d i s c i p l e Zeno taught t h a t t h e o n l y t r u e b e i n g and  indivisible.  Any  i s the One,  his  which i s i n f i n i t e  change, m o t i o n , or o p p o s i t e s , t h e n , a r e i l l u s o r y .  as I p o i n t e d out, H e r a c l i t u s a l s o b e l i e v e d i n the One.  H i s c o n c e r n was  But, the  31  r e l a t i o n between t h e w o r l d of e v e n t s , of i l l u s i o n s i f you w i l l , and t h e One. Parmenides d e v o t e s h i s energy t o t h e One i t s e l f .  I suspect t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e s  between the two was more one of emphasis and a t t e n t i o n t h a n a n y t h i n g e l s e . might a l s o note t h a t Parmenides' second major work has been l o s t t o u s . t i t l e was The Way  I  Its  of O p i n i o n and i t can be r e a s o n a b l y supposed t o have d e a l t  more w i t h the p e r c e i v e d w o r l d t h a n d i d h i s s u r v i v i n g p i e c e The Way  of T r u t h ,  i n w h i c h he taught the d o c t r i n e of the unchanging whole. Parmenides i s a l s o c r e d i t e d w i t h b e i n g the f i r s t t o i n v e n t a metap h y s i c s based on l o g i c .  T h i s i s t r u e , but i t s t r u t h must be tempered  another f a c t about h i s w r i t i n g s —  t h e y were a l l done i n p o e t r y .  The  with aesthetic  element of p h i l o s o p h y i s s t i l l prominent t o d a y , and I s u g g e s t , i t i s s t i l l  the  a e s t h e t i c , r a t h e r t h a n the f a c t u a l , a p p e a l of l o g i c t h a t e x p l a i n s i t s use. A younger contemporary of Parmenides was Empedocles.  He t a u g h t t h a t  e v e r y t h i n g i s composed of t h e f o u r elements of e a r t h , a i r , f i r e and w a t e r . D i f f e r e n t o b j e c t s r e s u l t from d i f f e r e n t p r o p o r t i o n s of m i x t u r e s . termed a " p l u r a l i s t " r a t h e r t h a n a " m o n i s t " such as Parmenides. w i t h such l a b e l s , t h i s a p p e l l a t i o n i s not e n t i r e l y a c c u r a t e .  He has been As i s u s u a l  Empedocles  b e l i e v e d t h a t the e t e r n a l , and unchanging r e a l i t y i s t h e c y c l i c m o t i o n and i n t e r a c t i o n of t h e s e elements,  T h i s e t e r n a l m o t i o n i s governed by a u n i f y i n g  p r i n c i p l e and a s e p a r a t i n g p r i n c i p l e . strife.  The former i s l o v e and t h e l a t t e r ,  L i k e Parmenides, Empedocles wrote i n v e r s e . The f i r s t p e r s o n t o i n t r o d u c e p h i l o s o p h y t o Athens was  Anaxagoras.  He s a i d t h a t mind i s the s o u r c e of a l l m o t i o n and added i t t o t h e o t h e r f o u r d i s t i n c t t y p e s of elements. The p r e - S o c r a t i c c o s m o l o g i s t s d e v e l o p e d a r i c h and v a r i e d s e t of philosophies,  I have m a i n t a i n e d t h a t t o speak of them as c o n t r a d i c t o r y or t o  c r i t i c i z e them f o r not b e i n g t r u e i s l i k e d e s c r i b i n g Rembrandt and Goya as  32  being  " c o n t r a d i c t o r y " or c r i t i c i z i n g Van Gogh because the sky doesn't r e a l l y  have a l l of t h o s e funny c i r c l e s i n i t . All  of the p h i l o s o p h e r s  of p r e - S o c r a t i c Greece b e l i e v e d i n an  r e a l i t y t h a t t r a n s c e n d e d the w o r l d of appearances. t o d e s c r i b e and  But  i n a l l c a s e s t h e r e was  the human p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e f a b r i c of r e a l i t y . e x c e l l e n c e , t h e good ( a r e t e ) . independent of man. introduced  No one had  an e x p r e s s i o n  T h e i r g o a l was v i r t u e ,  thought of d i s c o v e r i n g a t r u t h t h a t  i i i  was  AA  of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a l l of the p h i l o s o p h e r s  i s the scant a t t e n t i o n w h i c h t h e y pay t o q u e s t i o n s  considered  of e t h i c s .  e x p l a i n e d p a r t i a l l y by the f a c t t h a t p o e t i c v i s i o n s of t h e u n i v e r s e s e l v e s t o m o r a l i s s u e s o n l y i n an e x h o r t a t o r y manner. do  of  I t would come i n A t h e n s .  AA  far  the  That would come l a t e r , i n the c i t y t o w h i c h Anaxagoras had  philosophy.  One  They sought d i f f e r e n t ways  e n r i c h e x p e r i e n c e and managed t o e x c i t e many minds w i t h  power and b e a u t y of t h e i r v i s i o n s .  ultimate  T h i s may  As the f i f t h c e n t u r y  be  l e n d them-  Where codes of conduct  appear (as f o r example, w i t h P y t h a g o r a s ) t h e y tend t o be e x p r e s s i o n s  tabus r a t h e r t h a n r a t i o n a l l y c o n s i d e r e d  thus  of  or r e f l e c t e d upon s t a n d a r d s of b e h a v i o u r .  p r o g r e s s e d , p h i l o s o p h i c a l a t t e n t i o n began t o  swing from the heavens t o everyday l i f e .  The  f a s h i o n of p h i l o s o p h i c a l s p e c u l a -  t i o n spread t o broader w a l k s of l i f e , and became concerned w i t h r e f l e c t i n g upon c o n c e p t s t h a t had p r e v i o u s l y been the s o l e p r e s e r v e of myth and drama. l e v e l of c o n s i d e r a t i o n was The skills.  f a c i l i t a t e d by the a r r i v a l of p h i l o s o p h y  This  i n Athens.  A t h e n i a n s were c e r t a i n l y i n t e r e s t e d i n e x e r c i s i n g t h e i r mental  But t h e r e were more p r e s s i n g demands t h a n m e r e l y p a i n t i n g p i c t u r e s of  the p r i m o r d i a l u n i t y .  Athens was  governed by the assembly of i t s c i t i z e n s .  33  D e c i s i o n s were made by l a r g e groups of c i t i z e n s a f t e r h e a r i n g d i f f e r e n t s i d e s of an i s s u e argue t h e i r p o i n t s of v i e w . were d e c i d e d by the assembly and case.  each p a r t y was  Q u e s t i o n s of j u s t i c e , of r i g h t - w r o n g ,  contenders f o r  S i m i l a r l y , l e g a l cases  required to present h i s  own  of v i r t u e were t h e r e f o r e c o n t i n u a l l y  under p u b l i c debate.  There was  suasion —  c o u l d i n s t r u c t t h e A t h e n i a n s of the most e f f e c t i v e way  people who  swaying p e o p l e ' s o p i n i o n s . The  a g r e a t demand f o r t e a c h e r s  These t e a c h e r s  were t h e  of the a r t of p e r of  Sophists.  term " S o p h i s t " has become h i g h l y p e r j o r a t i v e .  T h i s i s due  mostly  t o the i n f l u e n c e of P l a t o . H i s p i c t u r e s of the r h e t o r i c i a n s a r e so b r o a d l y s a t i r i c a l t h a t a t t i m e s they become c a r i c a t u r e s ; but h i s l i t e r a r y r p o w e r ^and p h i l o s o p h i c a l o r i g i n a l i t y have so impressed themselves upon s u c c e e d i n g ages t h a t the s o p h i s t s and r h e t o r i c i a n s of Athens have become symbol i c a l of f a l s e p r e t e n s e of knowledge, overwhelming c o n c e i t , f a l l a c i o u s argument, c u l t i v a t i o n of s t y l e f o r i t s own sake, demagoguery, c o r r u p t i o n of y o u t h t h r o u g h a s c e p t i c i s m w h i c h p r o f e s s e d complete i n d i f f e r e n c e t o t r u t h , and i n g e n e r a l , a r e a d y s u b s t i t u t i o n of appearance for r e a l i t y . 9 Recently,  s c h o l a r s have begun t o t a k e a more s y m p a t h e t i c v i e w of some of  S o p h i s t s and  t o examine t h e i r p h i l o s o p h i c a l p o s i t i o n s w i t h a new  the  respect.  In  many ways t h e y a r e r e a l i z i n g t h a t the S o p h i s t s can be seen t o be t h e ones c a r r y i n g the mantle of t h e e a r l i e r p h i l o s o p h e r s , and P l a t o and A r i s t o t l e t o an a b e r r a t i o n t h a t knocked Western p h i l o s o p h y Space and  t i m e p r e v e n t me  f o r a two-thousand-year  from g i v i n g f u l l j u s t i c e t o the  There a r e many whose names I s h a l l not even mention. d e s c r i b e o n l y the p h i l o s o p h y i s a philosophy  of P r o t a g o r a s ,  be  loop.  Sophists.  Furthermore, w h i l e I  i t i s dangerous t o t h i n k t h a t t h i s  w h i c h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of a l l S o p h i s t s .  ... i t has been e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t such terms as a s o p h i s t i c mind, a s o p h i s t i c m o r a l i t y , a s o p h i s t i c s c e p t i c i s m , and o t h e r s i m p l y i n g a common b a s i s of d o c t r i n e are q u i t e w i t h o u t j u s t i f i c a t i o n . Their common c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were t h a t t h e y were p r o f e s s i o n a l t e a c h e r s , t h a t they a c c e p t e d f e e s , and t h a t r h e t o r i c was a l a r g e element i n the t e a c h i n g of v i r t u a l l y a l l of them. The g e n e r a l emphasis upon r h e t o r i c does not mean t h a t as s c h o l a r s a l l t h e s o p h i s t s found  34  t h e i r i n t e l l e c t u a l i n t e r e s t s c e n t r e d i n r h e t o r i c . But r h e t o r i c was the one s u b j e c t w i t h w h i c h they c o u l d be s u r e t o make a l i v i n g . The c o n d i t i o n s w h i c h made r h e t o r i c a l t r a i n i n g a u n i v e r s a l n e c e s s i t y i n Athens have been f r e q u e n t l y s e t f o r t h . The s o p h i s t who was a master of r h e t o r i c had a number of p o s s i b i l i t i e s b e f o r e him. He c o u l d w i n power and r e p u t e from t h e d e l i v e r y of e u l o g i s t i c o r a t i o n s a t p u b l i c f u n e r a l s , or d e l i b e r a t i v e a d d r e s s e s a t t i m e s of p o l i t i c a l c r i s e s . He c o u l d appear a t games, o r upon o c c a s i o n s of h i s own making, w i t h what we sometimes c a l l o c c a s i o n a l , or l i t e r a r y , a d d r e s s e s , expounding Homer or o t h e r works of Greek l i t e r a t u r e . He c o u l d w r i t e speeches f o r c l i e n t s who were t o appear i n c o u r t . He was not a l l o w e d t o appear i n p e r s o n as an a d v o c a t e u n l e s s he c o u l d show t h a t he had a d i r e c t c o n n e c t i o n w i t h the c a s e , but the p r o f e s s i o n of l o g o g r a p h e r was p r o f i t a b l e . ^ R h e t o r i c formed a v i t a l p a r t of the S o p h i s t s ' i n t e l l e c t u a l though few of them a c t u a l l y s t u d i e d i t as a s u b j e c t .  activities,  The d i s t i n c t i o n I am  suggesting  i s analogous t o the d i f f e r e n c e between the study of l o g i c and  of l o g i c .  Because of the i n t i m a t e c o n n e c t i o n between s o p h i s t r y and  use  rhetoric,  the ignominy c a s t upon the former a l s o brought the l a t t e r i n t o d i s r e p u t e . Even t o d a y the word " r h e t o r i c " s u g g e s t s something underhanded and deceitful.  I t i s mere g i f t wrapping f o r t h e r e a l l y i m p o r t a n t  and  S i n c e r h e t o r i c ' s demise was  facts,  occasioned  somewhat  things —  f i r s t of a l l by the  logic downfall  of t h e S o p h i s t s , i t i s a p p r o p r i a t e t h a t the r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of r h e t o r i c should commence w i t h a new The was  l o o k a t the t e a c h e r s of a n c i e n t A t h e n s .  g r e a t e s t of the S o p h i s t s i n terms of p h i l o s o p h i c a l s o p h i s t i c a t i o n ,  Protagoras.  P r o f e s s o r F.C.S, S c h i l l e r , t h e founder of pragmatism, wrote the  f o l l o w i n g statement: Our o n l y hope of u n d e r s t a n d i n g knowledge, our o n l y chance of keeping p h i l o s o p h y a l i v e by n o u r i s h i n g i t w i t h the r e a l i t i e s of l i f e , l i e s i n g o i n g back from P l a t o to P r o t a g o r a s , and c e a s i n g t o m i s u n d e r s t a n d the g r e a t teacher who d i s c o v e r e d t h e measure of man's u n i v e r s e . H One  of the problems i n g a i n i n g an adequate u n d e r s t a n d i n g  of  Protagoras,  or any of the S o p h i s t s , i s the s m a l l number of t h e i r w r i t t e n works w h i c h have s u r v i v e d t o the p r e s e n t .  A l s o , the S o p h i s t s , f o r the most p a r t , d i r e c t e d t h e i r  a t t e n t i o n towards the e d i f i c a t i o n of t h e i r immediate l i s t e n e r s r a t h e r t h a n t o  35  future readers. writing.  They a c c o r d i n g l y , spent more of t h e i r t i m e speaking  than  The works t h a t P r o t a g o r a s d i d w r i t e were l a r g e l y d e s t r o y e d  after  h i s e x i l e , when the A t h e n i a n s c o l l e c t e d h i s books and p u b l i c l y burned them. F o r t u n a t e l y t h e r e a r e s u f f i c i e n t r e f e r e n c e s t o him and t h e t h i n g s he s a i d i n the works of h i s c o n t e m p o r a r i e s  t h a t we can a s c e r t a i n h i s c h i e f  philosophical  doctrines. P r o t a g o r a s ' thought has two d i s t i n c t movements —  one n e g a t i v e  and  12 the o t h e r p o s i t i v e . Antilogiae.  The f i r s t i s the theme of h i s i n i t i a l book, t h e  He m a i n t a i n e d t h a t i n every e x p e r i e n c e , t h e r e are two l o g o i i n  o p p o s i t i o n t o each o t h e r ( d i s s o i l o g o i ) . The concept;of  l o g o s was a v i t a l p a r t of Greek thought.  In f a c t , i t  has become something of an academic commonplace t o say t h a t i t h e development of a n c i e n t Greece was  t h a t f r o m mythos to l o g o s .  s t a n d i n g the concept of t h i s phrase.  The d i f f i c u l t y i n f u l l y under-  of l o g o s has l e d many s c h o l a r s t o a s h a l l o w  understanding  They c o n s t r u e i t t o mean s i m p l y t h a t Greek thought moved from  m y t h i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n s of the w o r l d t o s c i e n t i f i c e x p l a n a t i o n s of t h e w o r l d . The  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of l o g o s w i t h s c i e n t i f i c r a t i o n a l i t y i s our own  p r o j e c t i o n on to the a n c i e n t use of " l o g o s " t o mean " r e a s o n " .  ethnocentric  We t h i n k of  " r e a s o n " as s c i e n t i f i c o r l o g i c a l thought; t h e r e f o r e logos-mmst mean s c i e n t i f i c or l o g i c a l thought. the i d e a .  I n f a c t , l o g o s i s a l s o used t o mean t h e word, and  I t c o u l d mean a s e r i e s of words, a t e x t , or a speech.  used to s i g n i f y t h e c a p a c i t y f o r language,  I t c o u l d be  or even t h e d i v i n e w i l l of  H e r a c l i t u s r e f e r r e d t o t h e p r i n c i p l e by w h i c h t h e o p p o s i t e s r e v e a l t o us as l o g o s .  T h i s power of l o g o s over our e x p e r i e n c e was  God.  themselves  r e c o g n i z e d i n one  form or another by most of the e a r l i e r p h i l o s o p h e r s , and i t was by the S o p h i s t s .  sometimes  often eulogized  36  One  of the b e s t known of these  a contemporary and  academic competitor  e u l o g i e s was  of P l a t o .  composed by  Isocrates,  I s o c r a t e s says t h a t i t i s  logos which d i s t i n g u i s h e s humanity from other l i v i n g  things.  .., because we have the i n n a t e c a p a c i t y t o c o n v i n c e each other and express our o p i n i o n s , d e s i r e s , and d e c i s i o n s , we not o n l y surpass a l l w i l d l i f e but have succeeded i n forming a s o c i e t y , b u i l d i n g towns, f o r m u l a t i n g laws and d i s c o v e r i n g a l l s o r t s of techniques. ... the Word enables us to put the wicked t o shame and commend the good, to educate the i g n o r a n t and t o l e a r n from t h e w i s e ... the Word d i r e c t s a l l our thoughts and a c t i v i t i e s , our use of i t b e i n g p r o p o r t i o n a t e to the degree of our i n t e l l i g e n c e . ^ The magic or c r e a t i v e power of l o g o s was not  only c o n s t r u c t s , i t " d i r e c t s " our  the hegemoon of thought and p r i n c e , l e a d e r , or guide.  i t s most important  experiences  experience.  and a c t i o n s .  The  It  Logos i s  Hegemoon meant something l i k e a  Logos then has a k i n d of a u t h o r i t y — not  c o e r c i v e k i n d , but r a t h e r the s o r t t h a t an o l d e r b r o t h e r f r i e n d might g i v e .  feature.  or more  the  experienced  d i r e c t i o n t h a t i t suggests i s f r e e l y chosen, not  imposed. For P r o t a g o r a s , experienced. every  logos denoted the p r i n c i p l e by which t h i n g s  H i s statement t h a t t h e r e a r e two  experience  contains  i t s own  opposite  l o g o i i n e v e r y t h i n g means t h a t  or n e g a t i o n .  c l o s e l y resembles H e r a c l i t u s ' d o c t r i n e of o p p o s i t e s . t h a t , when men  p e r c e i v e i n common, i t i s due  d i s a g r e e , logos does not hand, taught thereby  The  But H e r a c l i t u s  Protagoras  t h a t a l l t h i n g s c o n t a i n or c o n s i s t of two  It f i r s t  taught  on the  other  opposing l o g o i , and  are  uncertainty.  d e s c r i p t i o n of the c o n f l i c t  Greek psyche f o r a l o n g time.  I t i s an i d e a t h a t  t o t h e u n i v e r s a l l o g o s ; when they  e x i s t , or i s not p r e s e n t .  a l l s u b j e c t t o disagreement and  are  of o p p o s i t e s had  showed up  been p r e s e n t  i n the e a r l y and  m y t h o l o g i e s i n the g u i s e of moral dilemmas that the world  i n the  Homeric  posed f o r both gods  37  and men.  The d r a m a t i c  d i a n ' s work,  e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e problem formed t h e c o r e of t h e t r a g e -  The i d e a of t h e c o n f l i c t i n g s i d e s o f j u s t i c e o r m o r a l i t y ( d i k e )  i s a fundamental element i n , f o r example, t h e A e s c h y c l e a n  drama.  ... a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , t h e r e f o r e , of t h e A e s c h y l e a n drama i s t h e spasmodic h a r s h n e s s i n w h i c h t h i s double n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y f i n d s e x p r e s s i o n . T h i s thought i s dominant i n a l l t h e t r a g e d i e s of A e s c h y l u s ; i n t h e S u p p l i c e s , where t h e Logos o f t h e Danaides contends w i t h t h a t o f t h e r e s p o n s i b l e power o f t h e S t a t e ; i n t h e P e r s a e t h e d i v i n e a u t h o r i t y imposes on X e r x e s a c o n t r a d i c t o r y a c t i o n such t h a t i t was p o s s i b l e t o speak o f a d i v i s i o n i n t h e mind of God; i n t h e Prometheus t h e r e a r i s e s t h e g r e a t e s t c o n f l i c t of God w i t h h i m s e l f ; i n t h e Seven A g a i n s t Thebes t h e problem b e g i n s t o be c o n c e n t r a t e d on a b s t r a c t d i k e from t h e moment when Agamemnon has taken h i s t r a g i c d e c i s i o n a t A u l i s , t i l l t h e end of the t r i l o g y . I n the Choephori the c o n f l i c t which a r i s e s f o r d i k e i n t h e h e a r t i s c a r r i e d t o a t r a g i c p i t c h of anguished s u f f e r i n g throughout t h e course o f t h e whole drama, i n such a way t h a t a l l a r e g r a d u a l l y i n v o l v e d . O r e s t e s , who must by d i v i n e e d i c t commit m a t r i c i d e , t h u s v i o l a t i n g another, d i v i n e e d i c t , when a f t e r much thought he r e a l i z e s h i s t r u e s i t u a t i o n , e x c l a i m s : 'Ares w i l l come into c o n f l i c t with Ares, Dike with Dike. God w i l l war w i t h God, and j u s t i c e w i t h j u s t i c e . The  tragedy  i n v o l v e d i n r e l a t i v i t y was w e l l known t o t h e Greek mind,  but i t was n o t u n t i l P r o t a g o r a s  t h a t anyone attempted t o r e f l e c t p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y  upon t h i s element of human e x i s t e n c e . Only i n t h e l i g h t o f h i s t h e o r y o f l o g o i i n o p p o s i t i o n c a n P r o t a g o r a s ' a g n o s t i c opening of the A n t i l o g a i e be p r o p e r l y a p p r e c i a t e d : Concerning t h e gods, I am n o t i n a p o s i t i o n t o e x p e r i e n c e t h e i r phenomenal e x i s t e n c e or o t h e r w i s e , nor t h e i r n a t u r e w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e i r e x t e r n a l m a n i f e s t a t i o n ; f o r t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s a r e many, w h i c h p r e v e n t t h i s e x p e r i e n c e ; n o t o n l y t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y of h a v i n g a s e n s e - e x p e r i e n c e of t h e gods, b u t a l s o t h e b r e v i t y of human l i f e . 1 5 He showed t h a t i t would be i m p o s s i b l e t o a s c e r t a i n e i t h e r t h e e x i s t e n c e or the non-existence  of t h e gods, by means o f p e r c e p t i o n or by means of l o g i c .  T h i s i s because i n every p e r c e p t i o n o r p r o o f o f t h e gods, t h e r e i s a l s o t h e opposing l o g o i •— t h e o p p o s i t e and i n c o n s i s t e n t c o n c l u s i o n c a n always be reached.  T h i s i s t h e same s o r t of t h i n g t h a t E a s t e r n p h i l o s o p h y  claimed  38  about t h e d i v i n e .  Because i t i s t h e fundamental r e a l i t y , i t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o  speak of i t , except i n paradox.  Protagoras'  u l t i m a t e c a s e of h i s c l a i m about e v e r y t h i n g . statement r e g a r d i n g  statement about t h e gods i s t h e I f t h e r e cannot be a c e r t a i n  even t h e gods, how c a n we expect t h a t any t r u t h a t a l l i s  attainable? Opinion important  (doxa) r a t h e r t h a n knowledge h o l d s r u l e over even t h e most  concepts.  once, a t t e m p t i n g  Protagoras  engaged P e r i c l e s i n argument f o r an e n t i r e day  t o d e c i d e who was t o blame f o r t h e a c c i d e n t a l k i l l i n g of a  s p e c t a t o r a t a j a v e l i n - t h r o w i n g match — of t h e c o m p e t i t i o n .  t h e man who threw i t , or t h e s u p e r v i s o r  T h i s i n c i d e n t has been i n t e r p r e t e d a s t e a c h i n g :  ... t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f d e c i d i n g w h i c h was t h e cause — t h e a b s o l u t e l y c a p r i c i o u s and a r b i t r a r y c h a r a c t e r of t h e c h o i c e . 1 6 I t taught t h e complete dependence o f r i g h t ( d i k e ) on o p i n i o n  (doxa).  What was t r u e f o r j u s t i c e a l s o a p p l i e d t o m o r a l i t y .  The Greek word  d i k e c o m p r i s e s not o n l y our whole concept o f r i g h t and j u s t i c e , b u t a l s o t h a t of m o r a l or e t h i c a l goodness.  Protagoras  a l l spheres of human e x p e r i e n c e artistic  and a c t i v i t y , t o judgements of u s e f u l n e s s , o f  w o r t h , and even t o mathematics and geometry. The  led  extended h i s c l a i m of r e l a t i v i t y t o  Protagoras  knowledge.  o l d n o t i o n of o p p o s i t e s , o f t h e paradox i n h e r e n t i n e x i s t e n c e , t o t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e r e i s no such t h i n g a s c e r t a i n  He i s a c c o r d i n g l y o f t e n d e s c r i b e d a s a s c e p t i c . ^  wrong c o n c l u s i o n .  He d e n i e d  c o v e r i n g t h e t r u t h , he denied  This i s a  not m e r e l y t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of l e a r n i n g or d i s t h a t t h e r e even i s such a t h i n g .  This  involves  a t r a g e d y f o r t h e i n t e l l e c t f o r i t i s t h e mind i t s e l f w h i c h a u t h o r s t h e l o g o i in opposition.  The mind t h e r e f o r e must go t h r o u g h t h e t r a g e d y  involved i n the  r e a l i z a t i o n of t h e paradox.  Had he been m e r e l y a s c e p t i c , P r o t a g o r a s  would  have stopped a t t h i s p o i n t .  Remember, however, t h a t he d i d n o t suddenly have  39  an i n s i g h t t h a t d i s s u a d e d him of t r u t h .  He had never b e l i e v e d i n i t .  The  b e l i e f i n t r u t h as an i n d e p e n d e n t l y e x i s t e n t " f a c t " had not y e t e n t e r e d p h i l o s o p h i c a l mind.  The  statement  the  of d i s s o i l o g o i i s a s t a r t i n g p o i n t , not  a conclusion. I n o r d e r to t r a n s c e n t the t r a g e d y of u n c e r t a i n t y t h a t n e c e s s a r i l y i n h e r e s i n e x i s t e n c e , P r o t a g o r a s t u r n e d t o t h e q u e s t i o n of the v a l u e i n t h e e x p e r i e n c e t h a t man  does have.  How  c o n t a i n s the l o g o s of i t s o p p o s i t e ?  i s any e x p e r i e n c e p o s s i b l e i f e v e r y t h i n g To answer t h i s q u e s t i o n , P r o t a g o r a s  f o r m u l a t e d h i s most famous p r o p o s i t i o n : i s most o f t e n t r a n s l a t e d as "Man  JULCTCpoV C^V&piO^  T h i s phrase  i s the measure of a l l t h i n g s . "  P r o f e s s o r U n t e r s t e i n e r t r a n s l a t e s i t , and the. sentence  However,  i n which i t i s found,  i n the f o l l o w i n g f a s h i o n : Man i s the master of a l l e x p e r i e n c e s , i n r e g a r d t o t h e "phenomenality" of what i s r e a l , and the "nonphenomenality" of what i s not r e a l . He i n t e r p r e t s t h i s t o mean: ... One succeeds i n h a v i n g i n one's own power a l l t h o s e " e x p e r i e n c e s " of w h i c h one can say t h a t t h e y a r e r e a l , whether sense p e r c e p t s or i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n c e p t s , i n so f a r as t h e y have t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of becoming apparent ( t h i s i s t h e meaning I g i v e t o t h e word "phenom e n a l i t y " ) . The aim envisaged by P r o t a g o r a s c o n s i s t e d i n t h e m a s t e r y of a r i c h domain of " e x p e r i e n c e s " s i n c e t h i s was not r e a l u n t i l t h e moment when the " e x p e r i e n c e s " were f r e e d from t h o s e c o n t r a d i c t i o n s which c o u l d n u l l i f y a l l t h e i r v a l u e . ^ [emphasis added] The u n i v e r s e f o r P r o t a g o r a s i s i n a s t a t e of f l u x . becoming and c e a s i n g t o be. f o r the f i r s t time by man  It i s continually  I t i s the i n d e f i n a b l e a b s o l u t e t h a t i s determined  e x p e r i e n c i n g i t , and t h e r e f o r e t h e n a t u r e o f t h e  e x p e r i e n c e w i l l be v i t a l l y l i n k e d t o t h e man  who  brought i t i n t o a c t u a l i t y .  thus i s the master of e x p e r i e n c e i n two d i f f e r e n t ways. a l l e x p e r i e n c e , i t i s he who  brings forth r e a l i t y .  Man  As the r o o t o r cause of  As an i n d i v i d u a l member of  a community, he determines  t h e manner i n w h i c h s p e c i f i c " o b j e c t s " a r e p e r c e i v e d ,  t h e l o g o s w h i c h determines  the a c t u a l e x p e r i e n c e s .  40  The eloquently  paradox t h a t n e c e s s a r i l y accompanies d e s c r i p t i o n s of the One  s t a t e d by P r o t a g o r a s :  not e x i s t , nor a n y t h i n g true."  " i t i s n o t p o s s i b l e t o t h i n k t h a t w h i c h does  except what one  experiences,  but the l a t t e r i s always  As mentioned above, t h i s i s o f t e n w r o n g l y r e g a r d e d as a  position.  is  But, whereas s c e p t i c i s m n o r m a l l y  sceptical  e n t a i l s t h e d i s b e l i e f t h a t knowledge  of t h e e x t e r n a l can be g a i n e d from i n t e r n a l or s u b j e c t i v e s t a t e s , P r o t a g o r a s s t a t e s t h a t the s u b j e c t i v e s t a t e i s t h e o n l y r e a l i t y , and e x t e r n a l as w e l l as i t s e l f .  t h u s d e t e r m i n e s the  None of t h i s d e n i e s t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e  t h a t i t does e x i s t as a (somewhat K a n t i a n ) p r e - c o n d i t i o n t o  is real,  experience.  There s t i l l appears t o be a c o n t r a d i c t o r y a t t i t u d e between the negative all  " l o g o i i n o p p o s i t i o n , " and  things."  t h e c o n s t r u c t i v e "man  There i s s t i l l no e x p l a n a t i o n of how  p o s s i b l e , nor how than any o t h e r .  one  i s the master of  u n i f o r m e x p e r i e n c e s are  e x p e r i e n c e can be s a i d t o be s u p e r i o r or more v a l u a b l e  For the c r u c i a l t h i r d l e g of h i s system, f o r the main i n s p i r a -  t i o n t h a t P r o t a g o r a s has l e f t t o u s , we must l o o k a t the t h i r d of h i s c h i e f propositions. T h i s i s the c l a i m t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o change the l e s s e r of knowledge i n t o a g r e a t e r p o s s i b i l i t y of knowledge.  (XOV  fjt C U)  He e x p l a i n s t h i s i d e a i n a l o n g passage c o n t a i n e d  possibility  AOV^V i n Plato's  19 dialogue,  the T h e a e t e t u s .  He  says t h a t t h e f a c t t h a t man  all  t h i n g s does mean t h a t d i f f e r e n t men  and  t h a t n e i t h e r can c l a i m t o be r i g h t and  can and do e x p e r i e n c e d i f f e r e n t t h e o t h e r wrong.  mean t h a t wisdom does not e x i s t , or t h a t one The mind t h a t c o n t r o l s the l o g o s and improved and  i s the master of realities  But t h i s does not  o p i n i o n i s not b e t t e r t h a n a n o t h e r .  t h u s i s master of t h e e x p e r i e n c e can  t h e r e b y improve t h e e x p e r i e n c e t h a t i t c r e a t e s .  be  41  Strange as t h i s sounds, i t i s not d i s s i m i l a r t o t h i n g s t h a t we a r e a l l familiar with, who  P r o t a g o r a s m e n t i o n s d o c t o r s and f a r m e r s as examples of  a r e w i s e about c e r t a i n t h i n g s .  people  T h e i r e x p e r i e n c e s of t h e body, or of c r o p s  and husbandry, i s s u p e r i o r t o t h e e x p e r i e n c e a l a y p e r s o n would have. d r a m a t i c examples can e a s i l y be thought  of.  More  A computer e x p e r t l o o k s a t a paper  covered w i t h v a r i o u s g e o m e t r i c a l p a t t e r n s , and sees a new d e s i g n of l o g i c circuit. puck.  He l o o k s a t a hockey game and  R i g h t b e s i d e him, I see a b r i l l i a n t  sive s k i l l . at  sees a c h a o t i c movement of p l a y e r s and  i t and  One  s t r a t e g y of a t t a c k f o i l e d by  person sees an i m p e n e t r a b l e mass of v e r b i a g e .  sees a p e r f e c t l y d r a f t e d w i l l .  at random about the board.  defen-  A lawyer  glances  A n o v i c e sees chess p i e c e s s c a t t e r e d  A master sees a checkmate i n f i v e moves.  The  c a p a c i t y f o r s u p e r i o r e x p e r i e n c e w i t h r e g a r d t o c e r t a i n c l a s s e s of t h i n g s has been a c q u i r e d by each group of  persons.  I t would be wrong t o t h i n k of t h e improvement c o n s i s t i n g m e r e l y t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of f a c t s , or of knowledge.  of  None of the " e x p e r t s " mentioned  above perform d e d u c t i o n s based on a s e r i e s of t r u e p r o p o s i t i o n s t h a t t h e y know. R a t h e r , t h e y i m m e d i a t e l y r e c o g n i z e f e a t u r e s of t h e e x p e r i e n c e t h a t a r e i n a c c e s s i b l e t o the l a y person.  I t i s thus b e t t e r t o t h i n k of t h e improvement as  a c q u i s i t i o n of a s k i l l , a way  of d y n a m i c a l l y i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h the u n i v e r s e , of  s t r u c t u r i n g i t so as t o r e c e i v e a r i c h and v a l u a b l e s e t of e x p e r i e n c e s . s k i l l i s a t t a i n e d t h r o u g h p r a c t i c e and c o r r e c t i o n by a m a s t e r . wise people i n a g i v e n a r e a determine v a l u e s a r e those developed area. to  The  The group of  t h e v a l u e s t r u c t u r e of t h a t a r e a .  The  adhered t o and passed a l o n g t o l e a r n e r s i n each  These n o v i c e s t h e r e b y a c q u i r e the s u p e r i o r l o g o s , t h e s u p e r i o r  apprehend e x p e r i e n c e ,  the  The judgement of who  has t h e s u p e r i o r l o g o s w i l l  v a r y from community t o community and from t i m e t o t i m e . i n each p l a c e t h e r e w i l l be persons who  ability  But a t each t i m e  a r e w i s e i n v a r i o u s a r e a s , and who,  and in  42  t h e i r wisdom, determine the judgement of o t h e r s ' e x p e r i e n c e s .  Thus a r e v a l u e s  determined,  For no  and  y e t a r e not the s u b j e c t of f a c t u a l knowledge.  judgement i s r i g h t or wrong.  one's  I t i s b e t t e r or worse.  Between the wise men ... t h e r e i s a k i n d of i d e a l r e l a t i o n s h i p which a l l of them, farmer, d o c t o r , and t e a c h e r , e x e r c i s e i n some way w i t h r e g a r d to p h y s i c a l n a t u r e and w i t h r e g a r d t o i t s s p i r i t . T h i s a c t i v i t y a c c o r d i n g to a l i k e p r i n c i p l e i s determined by the f a c t t h a t each i n d i v i d u a l farmer or d o c t o r or t e a c h e r becomes an exponent of the advantage of the community, an aggregate of i n d i v i d u a l s of a s p e c i f i e d c a t e g o r y , which i s u n i t e d , e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l l y speaking, by a correspondence of a b i l i t y t o apprehend a g i v e n e x p e r i e n c e . The a s p e c t s of the a b i l i t y of apprehension on which a l l a r e agreed a r e c o n t a i n e d i n the c a t e g o r y " s u p e r i o r l o g o s " , those on the other hand i n which t h i s agreement i s l a c k i n g c o n s t i t u t e t h e " i n f e r i o r l o g o s " , t h e elementary f a c t of e x p e r i e n c e which r e s i s t s the demands of the community, and t h e r e f o r e of u n i v e r s a l i t y . ^ J u s t as t h e r e i s a g r e a t e r p o s s i b i l i t y of knowledge of farming medicine,  or  t h e r e i s a l s o a wisdom to be a t t a i n e d c o n c e r n i n g moral q u e s t i o n s .  In  21 order t o t i e h i s metaphysics t o e t h i c s , P r o t a g o r a s  c o n s t r u c t s a myth.  r e l a t e s the s t o r y of Epimetheus and Prometheus who, of the m o r t a l s p e c i e s , were charged of p r e s e r v a t i o n and  s h o r t l y a f t e r the c r e a t i o n  w i t h the t a s k of d i s t r i b u t i n g the powers  a t t a c k to the v a r i o u s s p e c i e s .  But a f t e r Epimetheus had  f i n i s h e d a s s i g n i n g powers t o a l l of the o t h e r a n i m a l s , w i t h none l e f t fire,  f o r man.  they found  Prometheus c r e p t i n t o heaven and  the "knowledge of the c r a f t s " which gave to man  by means of o b t a i n i n g or making food, s h e l t e r , and  and  injured  gathered  with  the a b i l i t y to s u r v i v e  clothing.  But  l a c k of t h i s " p o l i t i c a l a r t " .  Prometheus  w i t h Zeus.  together f o r p r o t e c t i o n , they were unable  each other through  themselves  s t o l e , along  had not been a b l e t o o b t a i n the " p o l i t i c a l a r t " , f o r t h i s was so, when men  He  to l i v e  And together  In order t o keep  mankind from a n n i h i l a t i o n , Zeus sent Hermes t o convey t o mankind a i d o s , which i s the r e s p e c t f u l acknowledgement of any justice,  s u p e r i o r i t y i n o t h e r s , and d i k e , or  i n order t h a t t h e r e be p r i n c i p l e s of o r d e r .  of t h i s " p o l i t i c a l knowledge" and  Each person r e c e i v e d a  thus community l i f e was  made p o s s i b l e .  share  43  The myth r e p r e s e n t s t h e r e l a t i o n of t h e two c o n s t r u c t i v e p r o p o s i t i o n s . The  "knowledge of the c r a f t s " i s t h e s y m b o l i z a t i o n  experiences. The  o f man's mastery over a l l  I t i s t h e i n d i v i d u a l c o n t r o l t h a t belongs t o each human b e i n g .  " p o l i t i c a l a r t " r e p r e s e n t s t h e s u p e r i o r l o g o s which succeeds i n mastering  the i n f e r i o r  l o g o s t h a t belonged t o t h e stage  The a b i l i t y t o have a b e t t e r experience  of "knowledge of t h e c r a f t s " .  with regard  every one i n t h e community by v i r t u e of t h e f a c t  t o m o r a l s then, belongs t o  that  they a r e a p a r t of t h e  community. It i s i n this l i g h t out e a r l i e r ,  t h a t we must approach P r o t a g o r a s '  t h a t j u s t i c e or m o r a l i t y  Because of i t s c o n n o t a t i o n s  So,  (dike) i s dependent on o p i n i o n  of d u b i o u s n e s s and i n f e r i o r i t y ,  i n f e l i c i t o u s t r a n s l a t i o n of doxa.  claim  pointed (doxa).  " o p i n i o n " i s an  A b e t t e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s "common sense".  t o say t h a t j u s t i c e i s dependent upon doxa i s t o say t h a t i t i s i n t h e  realm  of common sense.  attach value,  Even today, common sense i s something t o which we  We o f t e n a p p e a l  t o and t r u s t common sense, b o t h our own and t h a t  of o t h e r s , e s p e c i a l l y i n making moral d e c i s i o n s .  We a l s o r e c o g n i z e  that  certain  members of our community have a g r e a t e r measure o f common sense than o t h e r s , and  so we a p p e a l  make hard  t o t h e wisdom o f o l d e r and h i g h l y r e s p e c t e d  choices. Every  community has some s e t o f m o r a l b e l i e f s .  communities and none a r e t r u e o r f a l s e . people who a r e wise c o n c e r n i n g reflect  These v a r y between  But w i t h i n each community t h e r e a r e  moral questions.  These people determine and  t h e v a l u e s of t h e community i n t h e way t h a t e x p e r t s  other p o s s e s s o r s areas  p e o p l e when we  of wisdom.  of s u p e r i o r l o g o s , determine and r e f l e c t  i n other  fields,  t h e v a l u e s of t h e i r  A farmer a c q u i r e s common sense about c r o p s .  So, t o o , one  can a c q u i r e common sense about morals. While S o c r a t e s , a s we s h a l l see, thought t h a t t h e e t h i c a l phenomenon i s discovered,  i s already e x i s t e n t , Protagoras  held that i t i s constructed,  44  t h a t i t i s t h e work of t h e w i l l .  The b u s i n e s s of r a t i o n a l i t y f o r P r o t a g o r a s  i s t h e r e f o r e t h e a c q u i s i t i o n and e x e r c i s e of t h e s u p e r i o r l o g o s — to appreciate  and communicate the e x c e l l e n c e  participate i n creating. t r u e , but r a t h e r t h e good. to place value  the a b i l i t y  ( a r e t e ) i n t h e w o r l d w h i c h we  The fundamental t e s t of our t h i n k i n g i s n o t the Wisdom i s n o t a s e t of p r o p o s i t i o n s , but an a b i l i t y  i n the best things.  J u s t as t h e s u p e r i o r l o g o s c o n c e r n i n g o t h e r m a t t e r s i s a c q u i r e d i n s t r u c t i o n , p r a c t i c e and e x p e r i e n c e , v i r t u e ( a r e t e ) a l s o be a c q u i r e d . t h a t v i r t u e can be t a u g h t .  so t o o c a n t h e s u p e r i o r l o g o s  through  regarding  T h i s i s t h e meaning o f the S o p h i s t i c c l a i m  The t e a c h i n g o f r h e t o r i c was a means, n o t of a s c e r -  t a i n i n g t r u t h s about m o r a l i t y , but of a c q u i r i n g wisdom, t h e a b i l i t y t o e x p e r i e n c e i n a b e t t e r , or more v a l u a b l e way. people.  He t h e r e f o r e had t o be f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e v a l u e s t h a t h i s a u d i e n c e  already held. had  A s t u d e n t o f r h e t o r i c l e a r n e d how t o persuade  He had t o be f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e rough o r d e r o f t h e s e v a l u e s .  He  t o be a b l e , by means of t h e s k i l f u l use of language, t o l e a d an a u d i e n c e  t o see a s i t u a t i o n i n a s p e c i f i c manner so t h a t t h e c o u r s e o f a c t i o n advocated would appear, and hence be_, t h e r i g h t t h i n g t o do.  T h i s meant t h a t , more t h a n  anyone e l s e , t h e r h e t o r i c i a n had t o be f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e m o r a l s of h i s community. T h i s f a m i l i a r i t y l e d him t o t h e same k i n d of common sense w i t h r e g a r d  to v i r t u e  of a c t i o n s as t h a t w h i c h e n a b l e s t h e farmer t o j u d g e t h e e x c e l l e n c e of c r o p s or f a r m i n g methods, The  d i f f i c u l t y t h a t t h i s d e s c r i p t i o n seems t o encounter i s t h e q u e s t i o n  c o n c e r n i n g r h e t o r i c i a n s who a r e wrong.  How c a n r h e t o r i c i a n s be e x p e r t s i n  v i r t u e when t h e y u r g e t h e i r a u d i e n c e s t o do u n v i r t u o u s  things?  What t h e a s k e r of t h i s q u e s t i o n does n o t a p p r e c i a t e no e x t e r n a l standard  i s that there i s  f o r j u d g i n g whether t h e a c t i o n espoused i s r e a l l y v i r t u o u s  45  or n o t .  He must e i t h e r be i n the r h e t o r i c i a n ' s a u d i e n c e , or n o t .  I f he i s ,  and he c l a i m s t h a t the cause of t h e speaker i s u n v i r t u o u s , t h e n what he i s s a y i n g i s n o t h i n g more than t h a t he has not been persuaded. has f a i l e d .  H i s r h e t o r i c has been i n e f f e c t i v e .  The  He needs t o a c q u i r e more wisdom,  a b e t t e r a p p r e c i a t i o n of t h e v a l u e s w h i c h the a u d i e n c e h o l d s . t h a t the r e s t of the a u d i e n c e is^ c o n v i n c e d ? e f f e c t i v e , but wrong n o n e t h e l e s s . t o whom i s he wrong? right.  But,  suppose  Then t h e r h e t o r i c i a n has been  The r e s p o n s e t o t h i s i s easy.  According  The r e s t of t h e a u d i e n c e a p p a r e n t l y t h i n k s t h a t he i s  I f o n l y you and few o t h e r m a l c o n t e n t s d i s a g r e e , t h e n would not t h i s  suggest t h a t you a r e wrong? wrong.  rhetorician  No, says P r o t a g o r a s , t h e r e i s no such t h i n g as  There i s o n l y b e t t e r and worse.  F i n e , you say, and commence t o attempt  t o persuade the a u d i e n c e t h a t t h e y s h o u l d not have been c o n v i n c e d by the rhetorician.  To do t h i s you attempt t o get them t o r e s t r u c t u r e t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e  i n the way t h a t you do.  You t r y t o f i n d and a p p e a l t o commonly h e l d  beliefs.  You engage, t h a t i s , i n r h e t o r i c . An a n a l o g y might be made t o t h e change i n t h i n k i n g t h a t was o c c a s i o n e d by t h e development  of modern p h y s i c s ,  From t h e t i m e of A r i s t o t l e u n t i l t h a t of  A l b e r t E i n s t e i n , i t was thought t h a t i t made sense t o speak of a b s o l u t e t i m e or space.  An event c o u l d be l o c a t e d w i t h c e r t a i n t y by u s i n g space t i m e c o o r d i n a t e s .  The t h e o r y of r e l a t i v i t y d e n i e d t h a t such a l o c a t i n g was p o s s i b l e .  Einstein  showed t h a t any d e t e r m i n a t i o n of a t h i n g ' s p o s i t i o n i n b o t h space and time i s c o n t i n g e n t upon the i n e r t i a l frame of; r e f e r e n c e of t h e o b s e r v e r .  There i s  s i m p l y no such t h i n g as a r i g h t answer t o t h e q u e s t i o n of an event':s r e l a t i o n t o o t h e r t h i n g s and e v e n t s .  D i f f e r e n t o b s e r v e r s w i l l have d i f f e r e n t  I t s i m i l a r l y m i s s e s the p o i n t t o ask w h i c h m o r a l answer i s r i g h t . depends upon t h e o b s e r v e r ' s own m o r a l frame;'.of r e f e r e n c e .  answers.  The answer  46  (To push t h i s a n a l o g y one step f u r t h e r , we c a n t h i n k of E i n s t e i n ' s g e n e r a l t h e o r y of r e l a t i v i t y as t h e r e s o l u t i o n o f t h e " t r a g e d y " of u n c e r t a i n t y posed by t h e ' - s p e c i a l t h e o r y , i n t h e same way as P r o t a g o r a s ' t h i r d p r o p o s i t i o n r e s o l v e s t h e t r a g e d y posed by h i s f i r s t two  statements.)  To r e t u r n from t h i s b r i e f d i g r e s s i o n , a l l of t h e S o p h i s t s taught rhetoric. study.  But i t must :not be thought  t h a t t h i s was a f a c t u a l o r a n a l y t i c  There i s no s e t o f " v a l i d " r h e t o r i c a l forms t h a t a r e t h e analogue  of l o g i c a l r u l e s o f i n f e r e n c e . of a s k i l l , n o t o f knowledge. excellence —  The study of r h e t o r i c was t h e a c q u i s i t i o n T h i s s k i l l enabled them t o pursue and c r e a t e  i n t h i s way t h e S o p h i s t s taught  The  virtue.  growth i n t h e p r e - S o c r a t i c p h i l o s o p h y c a n be seen t o be c o n s i s t e n t .  For a l l , t h e u n i v e r s e i s an i m p e r c e p t i b l e u n i t y .  The p r i n c i p l e t h a t causes i t s  m a n i f e s t a t i o n s , or i t s d i s t i n c t o b j e c t s , i s o r i g i n a l l y l i f e i t s e l f , and i s governed by j u s t i c e ( d i k e ) . mystic transcedence,  The cause becomes numbers, and i s mastered by  or e c s t a s y .  The i n t e r p l a y o f o p p o s i t e s i s o f f e r e d a s t h e  cause of appearances, and emotions, s t r i f e and then l o v e a r e t h e means o f control.  The i n t r o d u c t i o n o f mind as t h e source of a l l appearance s e t s t h e  stage f o r P r o t a g o r a s ' i d e a s .  The u n i v e r s e e x i s t s o n l y a s i t i s e x p e r i e n c e d .  But every e x p e r i e n c e c o n t a i n s i t s o p p o s i t e . i n the universe.  There a r e t h e r e f o r e no c e r t a i n t i e s  The " l o g o i i n o p p o s i t i o n " i s a t r a g e d y o f t h e i n t e l l e c t , and  t h e i n t e l l e c t c a n master i t .  E x p e r i e n c e s c a n be " e n r i c h e d " and t h e i r v a l u e  preserved.  T h i s i s s k i l l w h i c h i s a c q u i r e d t h r o u g h t h e l e a r n i n g and p r a c t i c e of  rhetoric —  through t h e mastery of language and p e r s u a s i o n and t h e development  of common sense. E a r l y Western p h i l o s o p h y had reached a z e n i t h , but i t s most f o r m i d a b l e opponents were a l r e a d y b r a n d i s h i n g t h e i r weapons.  The e x i l e o f r h e t o r i c from  the a c t i v i t y of s e r i o u s t h i n k e r s was s e t under way by a younger contemporary o f Protagoras. student  The f i r s t and most t e l l i n g blows were s t r u c k by S o c r a t e s , and h i s  Plato.  47  iv  Everyone who  has encountered P l a t o ' s d i a l o g u e s  contempt w h i c h he h e l d f o r the S o p h i s t s .  i s familiar with  He c a r i c a t u r e s them so c r u e l l y t h a t  i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o u n d e r s t a n d the h i g h esteem t h a t t h i s group of enjoyed.  Why  d i d they a r o u s e such venom i n P l a t o ?  complex.  An important  day?  t h i n g t o bear i n mind i s t h a t P l a t o d e s p i s e d We  tend t o t h i n k of the e s t a b l i s h m e n t  " o b j e c t i v i t y " t o be p o s i t i v e and v a l u a b l e —  " e q u a l i t y " or " l i b e r t y " .  quered by S p a r t a and had  well into decline.  only r e c e n t l y regained  from the N o r t h .  B i t t e r n e s s and  as A t h e n i a n s v a i n l y attempted t o stem t h e ebbing t i d e .  automatically  l a y i n g the f o u n d a I t had been c o n -  i t s assembly.  feuding f i l l e d  P l a t o appears t o be more of a r e a c t i o n a r y t h a n a  We  a k i n t o Greek c o n c e p t s of  I n f a c t , a t the t i m e t h a t P l a t o was  t i o n f o r Western r a t i o n a l i t y , Athens was  n e a r l y every  of d u a l i s t i c meta-  p h y s i c s as an e x p r e s s i o n of an e n l i g h t e n e d A t h e n i a n democracy.  threatened  the  reasons behind P l a t o ' s f e r o c i o u s a t t a c k a r e b o t h s p e c u l a t i v e and  f a c e t of h i s s o c i e t y .  consider  teachers  What s t i r r e d him t o  d e m o l i t i o n of t h e i r c r e d i b i l i t y t h a t haunts us t o t h e p r e s e n t The  the  Barbarians  the c o u r t s and  In t h i s  assembly  situation,  reformer.  ... h i s U t o p i a owes a t l e a s t as much t o h i s d i s l i k e s as t o h i s d e s i r e s . Had t h e s o p h i s t s and r h e t o r i c i a n s been t h e o n l y o b j e c t s of h i s s c o r n he might not have been d r i v e n t o w r i t i n g the R e p u b l i c . But the p o l i t i c s , p o e t r y , a r t , e d u c a t i o n , and r e l i g i o n of Athens were a l l wrong — so wrong t h a t i t was e a s i e r t o p a i n t a U t o p i a t h a n s e r i o u s l y t o attempt the r e f o r m a t i o n of A t h e n s . We may say i n t h e b e g i n n i n g , t h e n , t h a t P l a t o ' s condemnation of r h e t o r i c and r h e t o r i c i a n s i s m e r e l y a s m a l l p a r t of h i s condemnation of a l l contemporary  So when we  c o n s i d e r P l a t o ' s r e j e c t i o n of r h e t o r i c , we  should  recall  t h a t he a l s o b a n i s h e d l i t i g a t i o n , p o e t r y , most m u s i c , o t h e r f i n e a r t s , freedom of speech, and most f o r e i g n t r a v e l f r o m h i s U t o p i a n s t a t e .  There i s no  place  48  for the  any  of t h e s e t h i n g s i n a n a t i o n governed by t h e a u t h o r i t a r i a n hand of  philosopher-king. The  r u l i n g c l a s s of t h e Athens w h i c h P l a t o so d e s p i s e d  of c i t i z e n s who  employed the S o p h i s t s .  f e e s f o r t h e i r t e a c h i n g was Sophists  S o p h i s t i c p r a c t i c e of  S o p h i s t r y and  Socrates.  power —  being perpetrated  i f the t e a c h e r s  had  caused such a good man  of t h e s e p e o p l e c l a i m e d  t h e n t h e y must be l i a r s and  city.  of h i s b e l o v e d  t o be k i l l e d must be  t o t e a c h v i r t u e and  teacher  evil.  justice, well  cheats.  P l a t o ' s g r e a t f e a r about r h e t o r i c was  t h a t i t enabled i t s p r a c t i t i o n e r s  t o c o n v i n c e o t h e r s of t h i n g s t h a t were s i m p l y " u n t r u e " , Socrates  Plato.)  t h e y t a u g h t them  by the  crowning blow must have been the e x e c u t i o n  Anyone who  charging  r h e t o r i c must t h e r e f o r e , t o P l a t o ' s mind,  be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e e v i l t h a t was The  t h e group  another s o u r c e of d i s d a i n t o the a r i s t o c r a t i c  taught A t h e n i a n s t h e means;:of m a i n t a i n i n g  the a r t of r h e t o r i c .  And,  (The  was  ought t o be e x e c u t e d .  Of c o u r s e ,  f o r example, t h a t  t o say t h a t such a t h i n g i s u n t r u e ,  i s t o say t h a t you don't b e l i e v e i t , t h a t you have not been persuaded. what b o t h e r e d P l a t o i s t h a t r h e t o r i c c o u l d persuade an a u d i e n c e , and t o an a c t i o n t h a t he b e l i e v e d was  So  induce i t  wrong.  He wanted t o i r r e f u t a b l y e s t a b l i s h t h a t h i s opponents were wrong t h a t he was his  right.  He wanted t o l i v e i n a s o c i e t y where h i s b e l i e f s , and  b e l i e f s , would be t r a n s l a t e d i n t o a c t i o n .  would be i m p o s s i b l e  t o govern d e c i s i o n s .  merely p a i n t i n g his p o l i t i c a l Utopia. f i c a t i o n f o r h i s suggested r e p u b l i c .  He had He had  would v i n d i c a t e h i s d e s i r e d s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l  (i..e.,  H i s contempt f o r t h e g e n e r a l  a t t a c h i n g any v a l u e t o common sense.  only  imagined a s o c i e t y where i t  f o r anyone's w i l l o t h e r t h a n a p h i l o s o p h e r ' s  t h a t agreed w i t h him) precluded  He  and  one citizenry  But he c o u l d not be c o n t e n t w i t h t o develop a p h i l o s o p h i c a l  justi-  to e s t a b l i s h a n a t u r a l order  that  order.  49  Now,  e s s e n t i a l t o the p u b l i c a c c e p t a n c e of r u l e by  i s the p e r c e p t i o n t h a t i t i s the o n l y good r u l e . standard  As I e a r l i e r p o i n t e d  w h i c h the Greeks a p p l i e d t o p h i l o s o p h i c a l s p e c u l a t i o n was  a e s t h e t i c appeal.  U n l i k e today, when we c o n c e i v e of p h i l o s o p h y  t r u t h , i n Greece i t a s p i r e d t o the good. how  philosopher-kings,  h i s philosophers  h i s t h e o r i e s and  P l a t o ' s t a s k was  q u a l i t y or  as a s p i r i n g t o  were the s o l e persons c a p a b l e of a t t a i n i n g the good,  t e s t i f i e d i n one  i d e a l of a s i n g l e u n i v e r s a l l y h e l d v i s i o n of the u n i v e r s e  incompatible  how  b e l i e f s were the o n l y " v i r t u o u s " t h e o r i e s .  or another t o man's c r e a t i v e or p a r t i c i p a t o r y r o l e i n the s t r u c t u r e of The  the  a c c o r d i n g l y to show  R e c a l l t h a t , u n t i l t h i s moment, e v e r y p h i l o s o p h y  world.  out,  w i t h p e r s o n a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n . P l a t o ' s g i g a n t i c l e a p was  way  the was  t o deny  t h i s p a r t i c i p a t i o n . I n order t o g i v e h i s b e l i e f s u n i v e r s a l a c c e p t a b i l i t y , he removed them from the r e a l m of o p i n i o n or common sense, and truth.  T r u t h had  h i t h e r t o a p p l i e d o n l y t o the f u n d a m e n t a l , i n e f f a b l e  P l a t o expanded i t i n t o the w o r l d forms.  enshrined  of appearances by means of h i s t h e o r y  them as One. of  H i s u n i v e r s a l forms were r e l a t e d h i e r a r c h i c a l l y b o t h t o t h e good  t o appearances.  The  the changing w o r l d  o n l y means of g a i n i n g a c c e s s t o the good was  of appearances and  l e v e l of a b s t r a c t and  u n i v e r s a l forms.  to  and  transcend  conduct your s p e c u l a t i o n s o l e l y a t  the  By r e s t r i c t i n g the domain of thought  t o the l e v e l of a b s t r a c t u n i v e r s a l s , P l a t o sought to e l i m i n a t e t h e v a l u e of vidual participation.  indi-  H i s b i f u r c a t i o n of r e a l i t y enabled him t o e s t a b l i s h the  quest f o r t r u t h as the s o l e v i r t u o u s g o a l of thought. Now,  such a c l a i m would be f a r l e s s p l a u s i b l e t o P l a t o ' s contem-  p o r a r i e s t h a n i t i s t o modern o b j e c t i v i s m .  He t h e r e f o r e had  of the g r e a t e s t p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s e f f o r t s of a l l time. t r u t h , t o an age  t h a t b e l i e v e d o n l y i n the good.  He  t o embark upon  one  s e t out t o market  the  50  Ironically,  i t was  Socrates' execution  "argument" f o r t r u t h ' s e l e v a t i o n . presented  and  He  epitomizes  the  i s i d e a l i z e d t o the  s e l f l e s s p u r s u i t of the h i g h e s t  S o c r a t e s ' d e a t h i n the name of t r u t h e u l o g i z e d  t i v e l y than any  is  U n l i k e the p i c t u r e t h a t i s p a i n t e d  Xenophone, the P l a t o n i c S o c r a t e s  of c r e d i b i l i t y . truth.  Throughout t h e d i a l o g u e s , S o c r a t e s  as the most n o b l e of men.  Aristophanes  t h a t gave P l a t o h i s best  l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s c o u l d ever hope t o .  the d e s c r i p t i o n of C h r i s t ' s death was  by  limit  ideal  —  i t s v a l u e more e f f e c In the same way  to e n s h r i n e h u m i l i t y and  that  l o v e of  God,  P l a t o ' s p r e s e n t a t i o n of S o c r a t e s ' death e l e v a t e d the l o v e of t r u t h to a p o s i t i o n where i t became t h e e x c l u s i v e avenue to the good. P l a t o had of h i s times. which one i t was  But  Socrates.  h i s m i s s i o n was  step i n h i s break w i t h the not yet complete.  c o u l d d i s c o v e r the t r u t h ,  the servant  They had  taken the f i r s t  rationality  He needed a means by  R h e t o r i c o b v i o u s l y c o u l d not  serve, f o r  of the S o p h i s t s , the d e f i l e r s of t r u t h , the s c e p t i c s .  used r h e t o r i c as a t o o l t o c l o a k t h e i r r e a l motives f o r p e r s e c u t i n g I f r h e t o r i c c o u l d be used t o accomplish  t r u s t e d to o b t a i n t r u t h , to a t t a i n P l a t o turned  evil,  then i t c o u l d not  be  virtue.  to an o l d e r t r a d i t i o n t o s u p p l y the b a s i s of h i s method.  Pythagoreanism had developed a means of d e s c r i b i n g the u n i v e r s e based upon the d e d u c t i v e  r i g o r of mathematics.  p a s s i o n a t e aspect numbers, and  of mathematics t h a t l a y behind  claimed  was  the Pythagorean use  t h a t t h i s method of r e a s o n i n g  the p r e - e x i s t e n t t r u t h , deduction  P l a t o s t r i p p e d away the e c s t a t i c  of  gave e x c l u s i v e i n s i g h t i n t o  He a l s o contended the a p p l i c a t i o n of d e f i n i t i o n  b e t t e r s u i t e d t o c o n v e r s a t i o n between two  where r i g o r c o u l d be maintained l e n g t h y monologues and  or  by b r i e f  q u e s t i o n s and  o r a t i o n s where q u e s t i o n a b l e  i n order to c o n t r i b u t e to the t o t a l e f f e c t . method of d e s c r i b i n g the u n i v e r s e ,  "seekers  and'  of t r u t h , "  answers, than t o  statements were s l i p p e d by  D i a l e c t i c was  the o n l y t r u s t w o r t h y  the o n l y worthy  k i n d of  philosophy.  51  In h i s a t t a c k s on r h e t o r i c , P l a t o causes v a r i o u s S o p h i s t s t o submit t o t h e d i a l e c t i c a l p r o b i n g s of S o c r a t e s .  Answers a r e put i n t o t h e mouths of  the i n t e r l o c u t o r s t h a t make a r g u i n g w i t h t h e S o p h i s t s l i k e s h o o t i n g f i s h i n a b a r r e l f o r t h e w i s e and n o b l e S o c r a t e s . 23 In the Gorgias,  S o c r a t e s i s t a l k i n g t o t h e S o p h i s t G o r g i a s i n an  a t t e m p t , he s a y s , t o d i s c o v e r whether a youth s h o u l d employ G o r g i a s '  services.  S o c r a t e s s t a r t s by i n s i s t i n g t h a t r h e t o r i c be d e f i n e d , and i t s uses enumerated. He g e t s G o r g i a s t o agree t h a t r h e t o r i c i s t h e a r t o f p e r s u a s i o n , and t h a t i t g i v e s no r e a l knowledge (episteme) b u t o n l y o p i n i o n (doxa).  Simply by g i v i n g  t h i s d e f i n i t i o n , P l a t o has l a i d t h e groundwork f o r h i s d e s t r u c t i o n o f r h e t o r i c . S o p h i s t s do not l i m i t t h e i r study t o o p i n i o n because o f an i n a b i l i t y t o d i s cover t r u t h .  They r a t h e r s t u d i e d t h e w o r k i n g s  of o p i n i o n because i t c o n s t i -  t u t e s r e a l i t y -— a l l b e l i e f s a r e t h e r e s u l t o f man's m a s t e r y over t h e l o g o s in opposition. G o r g i a s does n o t p o i n t t h i s out t o S o c r a t e s , a l t h o u g h we know t h a t 24 h i s p h i l o s o p h y was s i m i l a r t o t h a t of P r o t a g o r a s . r h e t o r i c by r e f e r r i n g t o i t s u s e f u l n e s s .  I n s t e a d , he d e f e n d s  He a r g u e s t h a t r h e t o r i c can be used  t o make people t h i n k i n t h e r i g h t way o r i n t h e way t h a t i s most d e s i r a b l e . But, once t h e b e l i e f has been i n t r o d u c e d t h a t t h e r e i s a body o f knowledge that i s inaccessible  t o r h e t o r i c , then any defense on t h e grounds of u s e f u l n e s s  i s bound t o appear tenuous and d i s h o n o u r a b l e .  To r e f e r a g a i n t o P r o t a g o r a s ,  r h e t o r i c i n c r e a s e s the q u a l i t y of t h e l o g o s used t o c o n s t r u c t and adjudge experience.  The a c q u i s i t i o n of t h e s u p e r i o r l o g o s e n a b l e s one t o c r e a t e , not  merely d i s c o v e r o r t e a c h the best v a l u e s . S o c r a t e s a t t a c k s G o r g i a s w i t h t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t r h e t o r i c c a n never r e a l l y r e s u l t i n r i g h t and j u s t b e h a v i o u r u n l e s s t h e speaker and  t r u e knowledge of T i g h t n e s s and j u s t i c e —  come from r h e t o r i c .  a l r e a d y has c l e a r  w h i c h , by d e f i n i t i o n , cannot  52  As p r o o f t h a t the S o p h i s t s r e a l l y don't know what t h e y a r e p r o f e s s i n g t o t e a c h , S o c r a t e s r e f e r s t o t h e f a c t t h a t so many of t h e S o p h i s t s and s t u d e n t s perform e v i l a c t s .  their  This r e f l e c t s Socrates' problematic b e l i e f that  a l l e v i l a c t i o n s a r e the r e s u l t of i g n o r a n c e about r i g h t and wrong.  I f the  S o p h i s t s r e a l l y imparted v i r t u e , t h e i r s t u d e n t s would be f a r more v i r t u o u s people than t h e y i n f a c t were. not acceded  Now,  the r e a l G o r g i a s would c e r t a i n l y have  t o the statement t h a t v i r t u e f l o w s from knowledge.  Indeed,  he  would have d e n i e d t h e e x i s t e n c e of knowledge and s a i d t h a t whether an a c t i o n i s r i g h t or wrong depends upon o p i n i o n . for  R h e t o r i c improves a person's c a p a c i t y  o p i n i o n s as w e l l as h i s a p p r e c i a t i o n of t h e o p i n i o n of h i s p a r t i c u l a r  community.  That a p e r s o n chooses t o do what h i s community deems wrong i s v e r y  p o s s i b l e , and i n no way  inconsistent with h i s teaching.  S o c r a t e s i n s i s t s t h a t , w i t h o u t a g r o u n d i n g on knowledge of t h e t r u t h , the r h e t o r i c i a n i s m e r e l y p a n d e r i n g .  H i s a c t i v i t y i s t o r e a l p h i l o s o p h y as  cookery i s t o the a r t of m e d i c i n e , or as c o s m e t i c s a r e t o t h e a r t of p h y s i c a l fitness.  He g i v e s t o the a u d i e n c e what i t wants r a t h e r t h a n what i s b e n e f i c i a l  to i t . T h i s suggests t h e one way at  the r h e t o r i c c a n be n o b l e .  Plato  proposes  the end of t h e G o r g i a s t h a t t h e t r u e r h e t o r i c i a n would seek t o improve  p e o p l e , r a t h e r than j u s t p l e a s e them.  the  But i n o r d e r t o improve t h e p e o p l e , i t  i s not s u f f i c i e n t t o d e a l w i t h t h e i r o p i n i o n s , one must communicate t h e t r u t h . Thus the o n l y w o r t h w h i l e r h e t o r i c i s one w h i c h conveys t h e t r u t h . 25 T h i s i s the main i d e a pursued  i n another d i a l o g u e , the  S o c r a t e s o u t l i n e s t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of a w o r t h w h i l e r h e t o r i c , and  Phaedrus. enunciates  as t h e f i r s t r u l e of good s p e a k i n g . The mind of t h e speaker s h o u l d know the t r u t h of what he i s going to say . , . There never i s nor w i l l t h e r e ever, be a r e a l a r t of speaking which i s unconnected w i t h t h e t r u t h . 2 6  53  So any person who a s p i r e s t o r h e t o r i c must, i f h i s c a l l i n g first  a c q u i r e the a b i l i t y t o d i s c e r n t r u t h —  i s t o be n o b l e ,  he must be a p h i l o s o p h e r .  It i s  important t o r e c a l l that a fundamental p a r t of P l a t o ' s epistemology i s h i s theory  of d i a l e c t i c .  conversation Plato f i r s t  Only the method of two persons seeking  t h e t r u t h through  enables one t o r e c a l l the t r u t h about the e t e r n a l forms.  s t i p u l a t e d t r u t h as the u l t i m a t e c r i t e r i o n of r a t i o n a l i t y , he  c e r t a i n l y d i f f e r s from the modern i d e a of how we a t t a i n t r u t h . invented  While  T h i s was  a short time l a t e r by A r i s t o t l e . Before  l e a v i n g P l a t o , i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o summarize t h e change t h a t  he made from the p h i l o s o p h e r s  t h a t had preceded him.  A l l of them, from  Thales  to P r o t a g o r a s b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e was f u n d a m e n t a l l y unknowable. R a t i o n a l i t y was devoted towards c o n s t r u c t i n g t h e o r i e s or p e r f o r m i n g a c t i o n s so t h a t they had a r e t e , v i r t u e , e x c e l l e n c e , q u a l i t y . g o a l o f t h e i r thought and a c t i o n . v i r t u e of being  i n the w o r l d .  Man played  The good was the u l t i m a t e  a c r e a t i v e r o l e i n the world by  P l a t o s a i d , no, t h e o n l y way t o a s p i r e t o the  good i s t o determine the t r u t h . The  p r i c e t h a t i s p a i d when one a c q u i r e s the t r u e a s an u l t i m a t e  g o a l i s the e x i s t e n c e of a l i v e d - i n and f r e e l y chosen w o r l d . t r u t h , there  i s objectivity.  T h i n g s a r e as they a r e , no matter what we t h i n k  about i t . Man i s no l o n g e r master of a l l t h i n g s . and  He has l o s t h i s freedom  i s now t h e s l a v e of f a c t s , Plato's belief  t h a t warrants m e n t i o n i n g . and  If there i s  i n t r u t h and h i s t h e o r y  of forms had another  effect  I f t r u t h was the s o l e avenue t o v i r t u e o r e x c e l l e n c e ,  i f t r u t h could not be known i n the world of appearances, of p a r t i c u l a r  s i t u a t i o n s , then the o n l y v a l u a b l e forms.  But o f t e n the a s p e c t s  t h i n k i n g concerned t h e g e n e r a l world of  of our experiences  which make them v a l u a b l e or  meaningful t o us a r e the " n o n - e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e s , " and our p e r s o n a l to these f e a t u r e s .  responses  By s t r e s s i n g t h a t o n l y the most g e n e r a l f e a t u r e s of t h e  54  w o r l d a r e v a l u a b l e , P l a t o stymied much of the wonder, the j o y t h a t r e s u l t s from p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a l i v e d - i n u n i v e r s e .  I t i s as though our group of f l e d g -  l i n g p a i n t e r s were t o l d t h a t the o n l y v a l u a b l e p a i n t i n g s were ones w h i c h d i s p l a y e d no p e r s o n a l t e c h n i q u e s ,  but o n l y a u n i f o r m commitment t o the  adorned shapes of t h i n g s around them. t i c a l U t o p i a appears so a u s t e r e and  un-  I t i s l i t t l e wonder t h a t P l a t o ' s  oppressive.  But t h e same a u s t e r i t y  polinow  a p p l i e d t o p h i l o s o p h i c a l t h i n k i n g , as o n l y the most a b s t r a c t q u a l i t i e s of t h i n g s became v a l u a b l e and u n i f o r m i t y r a t h e r t h a n q u a l i t y became t h e I t was was  ideal.  t h i s s t i p u l a t i o n t h a t o n l y t h i s s t y l e , t h i s f a s h i o n of u n i v e r s a l i z a t i o n  valuable  t h a t l e d to the near e l i m i n a t i o n of the p a s s i o n  the p r a c t i c e of mathematics.  C l e a r l y , t h e p r e - S o c r a t i c s had  t o make a b s t r a c t i o n s and u n i v e r s a l s t a t e m e n t s .  t h a t had had  the  motivated capacity  The v e r y use of speech neces-  s i t a t e s the a b i l i t y t o m a n i p u l a t e s i g n s t h a t a r e not w h o l l y t i e d t o t h e i r referents,  But, whereas the p r e - S o c r a t e s had  perceived  t h i s a b i l i t y t o be  the  source of human m a s t e r y over the cosmos, P l a t o used u n i v e r s a l s t o s u b j u g a t e human w i l l .  Whereas they had  been used a e s t h e t i c a l l y t o a s p i r e t o the good,  P l a t o used them l o g i c a l l y , t o " d i s c o v e r " the t r u t h . Once one has  the t r u t h , t h e n he i s j u s t i f i e d  f o r c e o t h e r people t o "know" the same f a c t s . p o e t i c d e v i c e may rhetoric.  be used, and  i n u s i n g any means t o  I l l o g i c , r h e t o r i c , and  even  indeed a r e used by P l a t o i n h i s a t t a c k s  I t i s h i s m a s t e r f u l a b i l i t y w i t h t h e t e c h n i q u e s of t h e  t h a t makes h i s a t t a c k s so c o n v i n c i n g  t o us  ( o r , should  I say,  on  Sophists  persuasive).  .,. the t r i u m p h of t h e P l a t o n i c S o c r a t e s i s not a t r i u m p h of l o g i c over o r a t o r y . John S t u a r t M i l l has put t h i s c l e a r l y : 'This g r e a t dialogue the G o r g i a s f u l l of j u s t t h o u g h t s and f i n e o b s e r v a t i o n s on human n a t u r e , i s , i n mere arguments, one of t h e weakest of P l a t o ' s works. I t i s not by i t s l o g i c but by i t s that i t produces i t s e f f e c t s ; not by i n s t r u c t i n g the u n d e r s t a n d i n g , but by w o r k i n g on the f e e l i n g s and i m a g i n a t i o n . ' 2 7  the  55  It  i s i r o n i c t h a t i t was P l a t o ' s r h e t o r i c w h i c h brought about r h e t o r i c ' s  l o n g r e j e c t i o n by a l l " s e r i o u s " t h i n k e r s . to  But w h i l e S o c r a t e s and P l a t o combined  e l e v a t e t r u t h t o the l e v e l of v i r t u e , i t was l e f t t o A r i s t o t l e t o demote t h e  good below t h e t r u e , and t o put t h e f i n a l s t a k e i n r h e t o r i c ' s h e a r t .  A r i s t o t l e d i d not share P l a t o ' s h o s t i l i t y to r h e t o r i c . taught  i t h i m s e l f , w h i l e he was s t i l l e n r o l l e d i n t h e academy.  I n f a c t , he He devoted a  l o n g and s y s t e m a t i c t r e a t i s e t o i t and t h e r e b y had t h e same major i n f l u e n c e on the subsequent study o f r h e t o r i c t h a t he had on so many o t h e r s u b j e c t s . the v e r y a c t of s t u d y i n g i t , however, A r i s t o t l e k i l l e d r h e t o r i c .  But i n  He d i d t h i s  by making i t t h e o b j e c t of h i s s c i e n t i f i c a n a l y s i s . A r i s t o t l e begins  t h e T r e a t i s e on R h e t o r i c w i t h t h e statement t h a t 28  r h e t o r i c i s the c o u n t e r p a r t of d i a l e c t i c .  Now A r i s t o t l e b e l i e v e d t h a t  r h e t o r i c was a p a r t of p r a c t i c a l wisdom w h i l e d i a l e c t i c was a p a r t of t h e o r e t i c a l wisdom.  P r a c t i c a l wisdom was concerned w i t h a c t i o n , whereas o n l y  r e t i c a l wisdom d e a l s w i t h t r u t h .  theo-  D i a l e c t i c and r h e t o r i c a r e a l i k e i n t h a t  they b o t h d e a l w i t h speech i n t e r a c t i o n s , b u t d i a l e c t i c i s t o r h e t o r i c a s t h e o r e t i c a l i s t o p r a c t i c a l , as t r u t h i s t o a c t i o n . I n order t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e d e v a s t a t i n g impact t h a t t h i s had, one must r e c a l l t h a t P l a t o had e l e v a t e d t h e t r u e t o t h e l e v e l of t h e good. good s t i l l m a i n t a i n e d  i t s s t a t i o n a t t h e top of t h e h i e r a r c h y of b e i n g .  now i t c o u l d o n l y be reached t h r o u g h t r u e knowledge of t h e forms. t r u e knowledge t h r o u g h t h e u s e of d i a l e c t i c . b e l i e f i n the t r u t h . i t was r e a l i z e d ,  The But  One o b t a i n e d  A r i s t o t l e had a c q u i r e d P l a t o ' s  But he r e j e c t e d d i a l e c t i c a s t h e method t h r o u g h w h i c h  I n i t s p l a c e he s u b s t i t u t e d s c i e n t i f i c d e m o n s t r a t i o n . A l l  56  knowledge was g a i n e d t h r o u g h t h e l o g i c a l and s y s t e m a t i c s t u d y o f n a t u r e — of appearance.  D i a l e c t i c was m e r e l y a method f o r communicating t h e t r u t h s t h a t  had been d i s c o v e r e d and f o r t e s t i n g one's r e a s o n i n g . J e a g e r w r i t e s t h a t "when t h e t h e o r y of Forms was abandoned (by A r i s t o t l e ) b e i n g and v a l u e f e l l a p a r t , and d i a l e c t i c t h e r e b y l o s t i t s d i r e c t 29 s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r human l i f e , w h i c h t o P l a t o was an e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e o f i t " . When A r i s t o t l e t u r n e d h i s s c i e n t i f i c a t t e n t i o n t o r h e t o r i c , his  s t u d y became a study of t h e f a c t s of r h e t o r i c .  from r h e t o r i c ' s v a l u e , because he was n o t concerned cerned w i t h t r u t h , different. of  then,  H i s study was a l i e n a t e d w i t h v a l u e , he was con-  The S o p h i s t s ' s t u d y of r h e t o r i c had been c o m p l e t e l y  F o r them t h e o n l y t r u t h was what was c r e a t e d .  The a c q u i s i t i o n  r h e t o r i c was t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of a s k i l l by which one s t r u c t u r e d t h e w o r l d  i n a v a l u a b l e way.  I t was n o t a method by which one d i s c o v e r e d o r m e r e l y  communicated a s e p a r a t e and p r e - e x i s t e n t t r u t h . T h i n k i n g o f r h e t o r i c a s an a c q u i r e d s k i l l r a t h e r t h a n a s a body of f a c t s e n a b l e s us t o understand why A r i s t o t l e ' s s t u d y was so m i s g u i d e d . for  example, o f l e a r n i n g t o r i d e a b i c y c l e .  Think,  A number o f f u t i l e a t t e m p t s a r e  made, a person who a l r e a d y knows how t o r i d e g i v e s " t i p s " , and g r a d u a l l y you acquire a f e e l f o r the a c t i v i t y . of  I n o r d e r t o do t h i s you must " l e a r n " hundreds  s u b t l e muscle movements and " r u l e s " which t e l l you what t o do i n case o f  various contingencies.  And y e t i t would be s t r e t c h i n g c r e d i b i l i t y beyond a l l  a c c e p t a b l e l i m i t s t o suggest t h a t l e a r n i n g t o r i d e a b i c y c l e i s l e a r n i n g t h a t for  example: The r u l e observed by t h e c y c l i s t i s t h i s . When he s t a r t s f a l l i n g to t h e r i g h t he t u r n s t h e h a n d l e b a r s t o t h e r i g h t , so t h a t t h e c o u r s e of t h e b i c y c l e i s d e f l e c t e d a l o n g a c u r v e towards t h e r i g h t . This r e s u l t s i n a c e n t r i f u g a l f o r c e pushing t h e c y c l i s t t o t h e l e f t and o f f s e t s t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f o r c e d r a g g i n g him down t o t h e r i g h t . This manoeuvre p r e s e n t l y throws t h e c y c l i s t out of b a l a n c e t o t h e l e f t , which he c o u n t e r a c t s b y t u r n i n g t h e h a n d l e b a r s t o t h e l e f t ; and so he c o n t i n u e s t o keep h i m s e l f i n b a l a n c e by w i n d i n g a l o n g a s e r i e s of  57  a p p r o p r i a t e c u r v a t u r e s , A simple a n a l y s i s shows t h a t f o r a g i v e n angle of unbalance the c u r v a t u r e of each winding i s i n v e r s e l y p r o p o r t i o n a l to the square of the speed a t which the c y c l i s t i s proceeding,30 T h i s i s e x a c t l y what A r i s t o t l e attempts to do i n h i s T r e a t i s e on R h e t o r i c . He  i d e n t i f i e s , c a t e g o r i z e s , and names hundreds of p e r s u a s i v e  And  techniques.  y e t , i f someone c o u l d not persuade b e f o r e he read i t , i t i s q u i t e c e r t a i n  t h a t the most he would have g o t t e n from A r i s t o t l e i s an e x t e n s i v e s e t of By s e p a r a t i n g f a c t and v a l u e , and robbed i t of a l l v a l u e .  then t r e a t i n g r h e t o r i c as a f a c t ,  From b e i n g the author  a s m a l l and r e l a t i v e l y unimportant what r e a l l y counted  —  of r e a l i t y ,  p a r t of the w o r l d .  the p u r s u i t of t r u t h .  an e x h a u s t i v e s c i e n t i f i c a n a l y s i s of how  And, all.  I t was  separated  But,  I t i s as though someone wrote  t o r i d e a b i c y c l e , but  and d i s h o n o u r a b l e  because t h e r e a r e those who i t i s done.  work of b i c y c l e a n a l y s i s p e r s i s t e d  then argued I f you  can  t o use your b i c y c l e .  will insist  I t would be for very  on r i d i n g b i c y c l e s , i t i s  surprising i f interest  the e f f e c t of making a l l r a t i o n a l study somewhat p e d e s t r i a n .  t h a t c o u l d be walked t o , the o b j e c t s of s c i e n t i f i c demonstration r e - e x p l o r e d , and rendered  re-explored again.  inaccessible.  The  places  were e x p l o r e d ,  T h i s l e f t whole u n i v e r s e s t h a t had  been  Many o t h e r s have d e n i e d t h a t v a l u e s " r e a l l y "  They a r e more d i f f i c u l t  f e e l i n g s yearn f o r the s k i l l  to forgive.  t h a t was  a b i l i t y t o s t r u c t u r e the world intellect,  i n truth  Many have attempted t o walk t o the u n i v e r s e of v a l u e .  l e g s j u s t won't make i t .  at a l l .  i n the  long.  The A r i s t o t e l i a n method combined w i t h the P l a t o n i c b e l i e f  But  from  i f you can o n l y get t h e r e by b i c y c l e , then i t i s n ' t worth going t h e r e a t  a c c e p t a b l e to study how  had  Aristotle  i t became merely  t h a t the o n l y p l a c e s r e a l l y worth going to a r e a c c e s s i b l e by f o o t . get t h e r e by f o o t , i t ' s unnecessary  tips.  But  s u r e l y our i m a g i n a t i o n  exist  and  taught by the S o p h i s t s , t o a c q u i r e the  i n a v i r t u o u s way.  The  c r e a t i v e r o l e of  the  the p a r t i c i p a t o r y r o l e of r a t i o n a l i t y can o n l y be f u l l y engaged once  the good r e g a i n s i t s p l a c e above the t r u e i n our day-to-day t h i n k i n g .  58  **  v i **  In the i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h i s c h a p t e r , adventure.  T h i s adventure s t i l l  l i e s ahead.  I spoke of embarking on an F o r many y e a r s Western t h i n k i n g  has assumed t h a t r a t i o n a l i t y n e c e s s a r i l y i n v o l v e s t h e s e a r c h f o r t r u t h . Accordingly, All  a l l of our r a t i o n a l endeavours have sought t o r e f l e c t  of our p h i l o s o p h i c a l c o n t r o v e r s i e s have r e v o l v e d  we can d i s c o v e r t r u t h .  the t r u t h .  around q u e s t i o n s  of how  Even i n a r e a s such as e t h i c s and a e s t h e t i c s , p h i l o -  sophers have concerned themselves m a i n l y w i t h t h e t r u t h , through a s k i n g questions  as whether m o r a l p r o p o s i t i o n s a r e t r u e or f a l s e , o r whether a c e r t a i n  method ensures t r u e m o r a l or a e s t h e t i c  opinions.  Many s c h o l a r s have begun t o q u e s t i o n  the dictum that r a t i o n a l i t y i s  p r i m a r i l y concerned w i t h o b j e c t i v i t y and t r u t h . of the e x i s t e n t i a l i s t s and phenomenologists. forms f o r s e v e r a l years by such p h i l o s o p h e r s Thomas Kuhn and P a u l K. Feyerabend. beginning  such  This i s reflected  i n t h e works  I t has been advanced i n v a r i o u s of s c i e n c e as M i c h a e l  Polanyi,  The s o c i a l s c i e n c e s a r e a t l o n g  last  t o a p p r e c i a t e a s i m i l a r p o i n t and a r e r e j e c t i n g t h e v a r i o u s l i n g e r i n g  forms of b e h a v i o u r i s m . But, as a p r o c e s s  i n j u r i s p r u d e n c e , most s c h o l a r s s t i l l  of d e t e r m i n i n g  what the law i s .  see l e g a l d e c i s i o n making  Judges a r e s t i l l  d i s c o v e r a p r e - e x i s t i n g r i g h t answer, and apply  expected t o  i t . The e n t i r e  controversy  between n a t u r a l and p o s i t i v e law can be seen as merely an argument about the truth.  This belief  i n t r u t h i s made most m a n i f e s t  i n f o r m a l i z a t i o n s , f o r the  v e r y a c t of f o r m a l i z i n g proceeds on t h e assumption t h a t r e a s o n i n g preserving" a c t i v i t y .  i s a "truth  I t f u r t h e r m o r e wrests the r a t i o n a l mind out of i t s  e x i s t e n t i a l s i t u a t i o n by s t a t i n g t h a t t h e s p e c i f i c o r p a r t i c u l a r content  o f any  s i t u a t i o n can be ignored without p r e c l u d i n g a f u l l u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e law a s i t applies to that  situation.  59  T h i s b e l i e f , t h a t the g e n e r a l which i n h e r e  t r u t h i s more important than the  i n the p a r t i c u l a r f a c t s , has  been t r a c e d  t o the b e l i e f  values  in  31 "universalizability". e s t a b l i s h a connection ity,  has  In f a c t , the c r i s i s between law and  been t r a c e d t o an " a r c h e t y p a l  t h a t r e s i d e i n our  1  psyches' .  One  i n modern law,  the  inability  j u s t i c e , between obedience and c l a s h between two  of these two  to  author-  opposing paradigms  archetypes i s described  as  r e l a t i n g to the " p o s i t i v i s t i c , w i l l - o r i e n t e d , p a t r i a r c h a l l e g a l system".  The  second i s based upon a supposed p s y c h o l o g i c a l need t o b e l i e v e i n u n i v e r s a l i t y . C l e a r l y , b o t h of t h e s e " a r c h e t y p e s " a r e based on the assumption of t r u t h . True statements about what the law w i l l of the p a t r i a r c h - s o v e r e i g n ,  i s are found by r e f e r r i n g e i t h e r t o  the  or by r e f e r r i n g t o u n i v e r s a l t r u t h s of  nature. My  p o s i t i o n i s t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z i n g the  s i t u a t i o n i n t h i s way  the p o s s i b i l i t y of another v i s i o n of r a t i o n a l i t y , p r e c l u d e s what may  w e l l be another " a r c h e t y p a l " b e l i e f .  the good, f o r q u a l i t y , f o r e x c e l l e n c e .  Truth  ignores  our a t t e n d i n g  to  R a t i o n a l i t y i s the quest f o r i s i l l u s o r y and  of l e s s importance  than v i r t u e . I s h a l l make a c o u p l e of q u i c k p o i n t s b e f o r e The  first  i s t h a t to understand the a n c i e n t  and  t h a t , i n such s o c i e t i e s , t h i n g s  so on are d i r e c t f e a t u r e s of the  of these s o c i e t i e s as u s i n g  their  chapter.  kinship"  Weisstaub seem t o , i s  such as laws, s t a t u s , tabus  experienced w o r l d .  sovereigns  this  or p r i m i t i v e " s t a t u s or  l e g a l systems i n a t r u t h - o r i e n t e d f a s h i o n , as Smith and t o miss the p o i n t  concluding  To  t h i n k of the members  as methods f o r a s c e r t a i n i n g what  the law r e a l l y i s , i s to i g n o r e the c r e a t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n t h a t these " p r i m i t i v e s " employed i n the s t r u c t u r e of t h e i r The  world.  second p o i n t concerns " u n i v e r s a l i z a b i l i t y " .  Eudoxus' p r o p o s i t i o n c o n c e r n i n g example of the n o t i o n  I t i s claimed  r a t i o s i n E u c l i d ' s f i f t h book i s the  of the u n i v e r s a l l y q u a n t i f i e d v a r i a b l e , and  that  first  that  this  60  n o t i o n u n d e r l i e s t h e i d e a of j u s t i c e . contemporary of A r i s t o t l e .  Eudoxus was a student  of P l a t o —  a  H i s p r i n c i p l e of u n i v e r s a l i t y was c o n s t r u c t e d on  h i s master's a u t h o r i t a r i a n metaphysics.  The s h i f t from t h e good t o t h e t r u e  preceded and made p o s s i b l e Eudoxus' u n i v e r s a l l y q u a n t i f i e d v a r i a b l e . But;:prior t o Eudoxus, p r i o r t o P l a t o , p h i l o s o p h e r s were engaged i n s y s t e m a t i c and profound r e f l e c t i o n t h a t c e r t a i n l y d e a l t w i t h u n i v e r s a l concepts,  i n c l u d i n g t h a t of j u s t i c e .  B u t , because they d i d not c l a i m t h e  a b i l i t y t o c o n s t r u c t u n i v e r s a l l y t r u e s t a t e m e n t s about j u s t i c e , t h e y a r e t o d a y dismissed  a s p r i m i t i v e and u n i m p o r t a n t . B e s i d e s h i s d e s t r u c t i o n o f r h e t o r i c , h i s Utopian s t a t e and t h e o r y  of f o r m s , P l a t o a l s o s t i p u l a t e d some t r u t h s about astronomy.  He i n s i s t e d  that  the cosmos c o n s i s t e d of p e r f e c t spheres moving i n p e r f e c t c i r c l e s a t u n i f o r m speeds.  Coupled w i t h A r i s t o t e l i a n g e o c e n t r i c i t y and p h y s i c s , t h i s paradigm  e x e r t e d a s t r a n g l e h o l d on c o s m o l o g i c a l  thought t h a t was o n l y b r o k e n by t h e 32  " i r r a t i o n a l " arguments o f Johannes K e p l e r , and G a l i l e o G a l i l e i , years l a t e r .  two thousand  C o u l d i t be t h a t P l a t o ' s s t i p u l a t i o n t h a t r a t i o n a l i t y be based  on t r u t h , coupled  w i t h A r i s t o t e l i a n s c i e n t i s m , has e x e r t e d a s i m i l a r s t r a n g l e -  h o l d on our r a t i o n a l thought?  Can we expect t h a t our d e s p e r a t e c l i n g i n g t o  t r u t h w i l l be viewed by our descendents w i t h t h e same s c o r n t h a t we smugly l e v e l a g a i n s t G a l i l e o ' s c l e r i c a l opponents?  61  -- CHAPTER THREE  Seeing  —  t h i n g s i n a d i f f e r e n t way does not occur  i n stages.  We  don't move from one p e r c e p t i o n t o another i n a s e r i e s of s m a l l , s a f e s t e p s . Rather,  once t h e new seed has been p l a n t e d , and t a k e n h o l d , i t s p r i n g s i n t o  f u l l bloom w i t h a w i l l seemingly of i t s own.  I t r e q u i r e s a plunge, a leap.  A r t i s t s and p s y c h o l o g i s t s have l o n g been aware of t h e a c t i v e r o l e p l a y e d by t h e o b s e r v e r i n t h e e x p e r i e n c i n g of many k i n d s o f p e r c e p t i o n s . know t h a t o r d e r i s o f t e n p r o j e c t e d onto random o r ambiguous p a t t e r n s . p e o p l e a r e aware of many o f t h e s e so c a l l e d o p t i c a l i l l u s i o n s . we can see forms i n i n k b l o t s , and i n c l o u d s . the p a t t e r n s a r e r e a l l y t h e r e .  They Most  They know t h a t  But no one a r g u e s about whether  C h i l d r e n spend many happy hours t r y i n g t o g e t  t h e i r f r i e n d s or p a r e n t s t o see t h e c l o u d s i n t h e i r way, and i n t u r n t o see them themselves i n new and p l e a s i n g ways. "Look, i t ' s a cow!  See, t h e r e i s i t s head, t h a t over t h e r e t h a t ' s  one h o r n , and t h e r e ' s the o t h e r , and o v e r t h e r e t h e r e ' s i t s t a i l .  See i t ?  See i t ? " "Yeah, I see t h a t , b u t l o o k i n s t e a d o f t h o s e b e i n g h o r n s , l o o k a t them as towers, and t h e n t h a t t h i n g down t h e r e i s a d r a w b r i d g e —  see?  It's a  castle!" Which i s i t ?  I s t h e c l o u d r e a l l y a cow, or a c a s t l e ?  t a k e such a q u e s t i o n s e r i o u s l y . to  Still  the c h i l d r e n that i t i s neither.  random a g g r e g a t i o n  No one would  l e s s would we t o l e r a t e someone e x p l a i n i n g  That t h e c l o u d ' s shape i s a more o r l e s s  of condensed water vapour t h a t assumes t h e shape d i c t a t e d by  v a r i o u s m e t e o r o l o g i c a l .and p h y s i c a l f o r c e s .  A p e r s o n who d i d would be seen a s  d r y , p e d a n t i c and i r r e v e l e n t — a boor who r u i n e d i n n o c e n t f u n , who took t h e magic out of a c h i l d ' s  afternoon.  62  Most of us have seen "degraded" Images of h i g h c o n t r a s t photographs. Look a t F i g u r e I . shapes.  A t f i r s t g l a n c e , i t i s a m e a n i n g l e s s jumble of  nondescript  But, i f you s t a r e a t i t f o r a s h o r t w h i l e , a p i c t u r e b e g i n s t o emerge.  The p r o c e s s i s hastened g r e a t l y i f someone t e l l s you t h a t i t i s a dog on a bed of l e a v e s .  Look, h e r e i s the head, i t ' s f a c i n g away from u s ,  here i s the l i n e of i t s back  You have j u s t a c q u i r e d a s k i l l —  sense" out of t h i s p i c t u r e . I c e r t a i n l y have not "proved" Now  and  ...  Suddenly the e n t i r e p i c t u r e c l e a r s b e f o r e your eyes. t h a t ' s what i t is.'  dalmation  Of  course,  t h e a b i l i t y t o "make  Your e x p e r i e n c e has been e n r i c h e d , deepened. anything to  But  you.  l o o k away from t h e p i c t u r e f o r a m i n u t e , a day, a week, a y e a r .  When you l o o k a t i t a g a i n , you w i l l s t i l l be a b l e t o make out the dog. o n l y has your immediate e x p e r i e n c e , but your c a p a c i t y f o r f u t u r e has been improved.  Not  experience  In f a c t , you w i l l p r o b a b l y have a c e r t a i n amount of  c u l t y s e e i n g the p i c t u r e the way  diffi-  you d i d b e f o r e you were taught t o see the  dog.  I t i s as though, f a c e d w i t h the c h o i c e of s e e i n g chaos or order, your eye of i t s own  a c c o r d sees o r d e r .  reappear.  W i t h some e f f o r t you can f o r c e the v i s i o n of chaos t o  R e l a x and t h e dog  snaps back.  I t i s t h i s w h i c h might l e a d us t o say t h a t i t i s r e a l l y a p i c t u r e of a dog.  But what j u s t i f i c a t i o n , or p o i n t i s t h e r e t o such a c l a i m ?  be seen as a dog, but when you f i r s t c l a i m t h a t i t was  r e a l l y a dog,  saw  i t , i t was  chaos.  even t h e n , amount to?  I t can  What does the  S u r e l y nothing at a l l .  T h i s p o i n t i s c l e a r e r i f we t h i n k about the next t h r e e f i g u r e s . F i g u r e I I r e a l l y a g o b l e t or two f a c i n g p r o f i l e s ? old  woman or a young woman?  Which way  These are a l l p o i n t l e s s q u e s t i o n s . one i s r e a l , and t h e n t h e o t h e r . shape of t h e c l o u d m a t t e r s .  Is Figure I I I r e a l l y  an  does the cube i n F i g u r e IV r e a l l y  Neither i s r e a l .  Both, are r e a l .  I t doesn't m a t t e r anymore t h a n the  Is  face?  First "real"  62a  FIGURE I I I  FIGURE IV  63  And  y e t , d e s p i t e t h e absence of " r e a l i t y " t h a t these  they r e t a i n t h e i r f a s c i n a t i o n .  images have,  T h e r e i s a j o y , an e x h i l a r a t i o n almost, t h a t  comes w i t h t h e r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t you c o n t r o l t h e p a t t e r n .  I t i s a k i n to the  e x h i l a r a t i o n t h a t comes from s o l v i n g a problem or a p u z z l e . What a r e t h e next two l e t t e r s i n t h e f o l l o w i n g sequence: 0, T, T, F, F, S, S? At f i r s t  glance  answer seems r i g h t .  t h e r e simply  "X, Y." "A, B."  p a t t e r n evinced by X, Y or by A, B. p a t t e r n , i n order  i s no sequence. Why not?  Any answer, or no  W e l l , because t h e r e i s no  You must be a b l e t o see the e x i s t i n g  to continue i t .  Most people t r y t o s o l v e t h i s p u z z l e by a s s i g n i n g n u m e r i c a l to  each l e t t e r based on t h e i r a l p h a b e t i c a l o r d e r .  " L e t ' s see.  values  '0' i s t h e  f i f t e e n t h l e t t e r , and 'T' i s the, umm t w e n t i e t h , and 'F! i s t h e s i x t h and 'S'  i s the n i n e t e e n t h ,  —  15, 20, 20, 6, 6, 19, 19 —  AARRGH'.  S t i l l no p a t t e r n . "  In f a c t , even the i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t the " r i g h t " answer i s 'E, N' does n o t immed i a t e l y help. '0' stands  First  the p e r s o n must l o o k a t t h e problem i n a new way.  f o r 'one'; 'T' f o r 'two', 'T' f o r t h r e e  ... Oh, I_ get i t :  "The 'eight,  n i n e ' -- 'E, N'." Now, t r y t o see t h e p a t t e r n i n t h e o l d way. Having l e a r n e d a way of o r d e r i n g the p e r c e p t i o n , But one c a n r e - o r d e r I have l i t t l e  I t i s very  difficult.  i t i s tough t o d i s o r d e r i t .  i t , i f a new way of d e v e l o p i n g  a p a t t e r n c a n be shown.  doubt t h a t someone w i t h m a t h e m a t i c a l aplomb c o u l d d e v i s e a f u n c t i o n  which would generate the numbers 15, 20, 20, 6, 6, 19, 19.  T h i s f u n c t i o n could  then g i v e t h e next two v a l u e s a s numbers which would r e s u l t  i n two d i f f e r e n t  letters  than E, N. If  important, it  Which answer would be r i g h t ?  I have o v e r l y l a b o u r e d  and d i f f i c u l t .  t h i s p o i n t , i t i s because I f e e l i t i s both  In f a c t , I think that i t i s t h i s request,  t h i s way" t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e s most human development  innovation.  "look at  64  Perhaps i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h i s k i n d o f a p r o c e s s goes on when a p a i n t e r paints a picture. says Rembrandt.  "Look a t t h e w o r l d t h i s way," says Van Gogh.  Which i s t h e r i g h t way?  What a f o o l i s h  "Or t h i s way,"  question!  A r t i s a n e x h o r t a t i o n , a n i n v i t a t i o n , a p l e a t o s t r u c t u r e your c e p t i o n s i n a c e r t a i n way.  per-  I t i s an i n v i t a t i o n t o deepen your own e x p e r i e n c e ,  and, by s h a r i n g i n t h e e x p e r i e n c e  of t h e a r t i s t , t o e n t e r i n t o a communion w i t h  a f e l l o w human b e i n g . To d e c l i n e t o do this,* t o say, " I r e f u s e t o see t h i n g s i n any way b u t my own u n l e s s you p r o v e t h a t y o u r s i s t h e r i g h t way" i s t o m i s s t h e e n t i r e p o i n t of t h e a r t .  I t i s t o l o c k o n e s e l f i n one's own room, and t o r e f u s e t o e x p l o r e  the v i e w from t h e r e s t of t h e c a s t l e . When a poet i n v i t e s us t o see "the garden i n a young g i r l ' s e y e s " , i t i s nonsense t O ' r e f u s e  because gardens a r e n ' t r e a l l y i n young g i r l ' s e y e s .  When  a n o v e l a s k s us t o suspend our d i s b e l i e f , we do so i n t h e e x p e c t a t i o n of an e n j o y a b l e or w o r t h w h i l e e x p e r i e n c e .  " I don't read S h e r l o c k Holmes books because  he never e x i s t e d " i s n o t a n a p p r o p r i a t e r e s p o n s e t o t h e g e n i u s of A r t h u r Conan Doyle.  See t h i n g s a s though t h e r e c o u l d be a Holmes, and you w i l l  (perhaps)  e n r i c h your l i f e by some s m a l l measure. Look a t t h i n g s t h i s way i n s t e a d of t h a t way.  T h i s i s t h e plea not  o n l y of t h e c h i l d l o o k i n g a t c l o u d s , n o r of t h e p a i n t e r , poet and p l a y w r i g h t . I t i s a l s o the i n v i t a t i o n of the great  s c i e n t i f i c innovators.  "Look a t t h i n g s  as though t h e sun i n s t e a d o f t h e e a r t h l i e s a t t h e c e n t r e of t h e u n i v e r s e , " G a l i l e o urged.  He d i d n o t , he c o u l d n o t prove t h a t i t d i d .  But he p l e a d e d ,  he c a j o l e d , he urged and he s t a t e d , "the sun i s i n t h e c e n t r e . t h a t way and see what you see." t r y t o see t h i n g s i n h i s way. i n t h e i r way.  Look a t t h i n g s  Because o f h i s p e r s u a s i v e power, p e o p l e d i d They d i d n o t l e t f a c t s , o r r a t i o n a l i t y ,  They chose t o see t h i n g s i n a c e r t a i n way, and t h e f a c t s  stand  65  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h a t way see the cow  appeared t o support t h e i r d e c i s i o n .  i n the sky, her t a i l and h o r n s appear of t h e i r own  "Look a t t h i n g s t h i s way.  "How  i n e r t i a l frame of r e f e r e n c e , " s a i d  would the u n i v e r s e l o o k t h e n ? "  He d i d n o t , he c o u l d not  t h a t l i g h t behaved i n such a s t r a n g e , c o u n t e r - i n t u i t i v e way. were persuaded by h i s g e n i u s t o t r y and deep e m o t i o n a l  The  But those experienced  who the  They l e a r n e d t o s t r u c t u r e  you can see the l e a v e s and  t r e e s without  f u l l i m p l i c a t i o n s of a g i v e n v i s i o n of the w o r l d a r e  n e c e s s a r i l y known t o the p e r s o n who  any not  f i r s t proposes or " p o p u l a r i z e s " i t .  maxim of a r t c r i t i c i s m i s t o " t r u s t the a r t , not the a r t i s t . " Bergman or Woody A l l e n aware of a l l of the symbolic I t doen't m a t t e r .  prove  as t o c o n s t a n t l y support t h e i r i n i t i a l d e c i s i o n .  Once you p i c k out the d a l m a t i o n , h e l p from me.  see t h i n g s t h a t way  a p p e a l of r e l a t i v i s t i c p h y s i c s .  t h e i r concepts i n such a way  accord.  Suppose t h a t the v e l o c i t y of l i g h t i s  c o n s t a n t r e g a r d l e s s of the o b s e r v e r ' s Einstein.  Once you t r y t o  They g i v e us a v i s i o n .  What we  Are  A  Ingmar  meanings i n t h e i r f i l m s ? see w i t h t h a t v i s i o n i s  up t o u s , not t o them. T h i s paper, b o t h what has gone b e f o r e and what w i l l f o l l o w , i s not a safe, sure, step-by-step  argument,  l o o k a t t h i n g s i n a d i f f e r e n t way.  I t i s an i n v i t a t i o n , an e x h o r t a t i o n t o I t i s a p l e a , not a p r o o f .  r a t i o n a l i t y i s not the quest f o r t r u t h ? i s the g o a l of r a t i o n a l thought?  How  •k*  What i f v i r t u e , e x c e l l e n c e , q u a l i t y ,  would t h i n g s l o o k t o us then?  ±±  it*  I b e l i e v e t h a t i t was A l f r e d N o r t h Whitehead who Western p h i l o s o p h y  What i f  i s a g l o s s on P l a t o and A r i s t o t l e .  s a i d t h a t a l l of  T h i s i s because n e a r l y  every subsequent t h i n k e r has spent the v a s t m a j o r i t y of h i s or her time  and  66  energy e x p l o r i n g , examining  and e x p o s t u l a t i n g t h e f o u n d a t i o n s and  of d i f f e r e n t ways of a c q u i r i n g knowledge. truth —  ramifications  The u n d e r l y i n g theme i n a l l has been  how we f i n d i t , what i t i s , and what we do w i t h i t . I have proposed t h a t p h i l o s o p h y , and p a r t i c u l a r l y l e g a l p h i l o s o p h y ,  would do w e l l t o attempt  t o p r o g r e s s by means of a r e c u l e r pour mieux s a u t e r ,  t h a t i t draw back t o l e a p .  Imagine a p h i l o s o p h y t h a t had developed  without the P l a t o n i c e n c y c l i c a l to t r u t h .  and matured  Imagine a p h i l o s o p h y t h a t i s grounded  on the i n t e l l e c t u a l f o u n d a t i o n s l a i d by t h e M i l e s i a n s , t h e Pythagoreans and  the  Sophists. The  f i r s t s t e p , and the one w h i c h must be c o n s t a n t l y borne i n mind,  i s t h a t the r e j e c t i o n of the u l t i m a t e v a l u e w i t h w h i c h t r u t h was means the end of our s l a v e r y t o f a c t s , t o r e a l i t y .  imbued,  But t h i s newfound freedom  i s not an unmixed b l e s s i n g . In f a c t , i t i s p r e c i s e l y the r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t t h e r e i s no  truth,  no " o b j e c t i v i t y " and no o r d e r i n the w o r l d t h a t i s a t the r o o t of t h e e x i s t e n t i a l i s t ' s despair.  When suddenly c o n f r o n t e d w i t h the r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t the  u n i v e r s e has no i n h e r e n t meaning, man's immediate r e a c t i o n i s one of f e a r , of d e s p a i r , of a n g s t .  The c o m f o r t i n g v i s i o n s p r o v i d e d by r e l i g i o n and  e v a p o r a t e , l e a v i n g us t o f a c e the c h i l l wind of chaos.  The numbing  science pessimism  of much of the work of J e a n P a u l S a r t r e , A l b e r t Camus, Ingmar Bergman and o t h e r s c a p t u r e s and c o n f r o n t s us w i t h t h i s d e s p a i r . who  Too many of t h e  people  have f e l t t h i s d e s p a i r have become i t s v i c t i m s . L i k e the born s l a v e who  i s suddenly emancipated w i t h o u t t h e means  or t r a i n i n g t o l i v e i n a w o r l d where one must fend f o r h i m s e l f , people have escaped the s h a c k l e s of t r u t h o n l y t o s i n k i n t o s p i r i t u a l and e m o t i o n a l t u t i o n , w i t h o u t v a l u e s , w i t h o u t j o y and w i t h o u t  fulfillment.  desti-  67  The  t a s k of e x i s t e n t i a l i s m s i n c e i t s i n c e p t i o n has  source of comfort and T h i s t a s k has  a v i s i o n of happiness i n the f a c e of t r a g e d y and  e s p e c i a l l y been undertaken by  G a b r i e l M a r c e l and M a r t i n The into contact  despair  I suggest t h a t i t was  considering  i n his presentation  negation,  more maxims:  a c q u i r i n g the  exactly t h i s despair  that Protagoras  of the " l o g o i i n o p p o s i t i o n " .  t h a t a l l i s chaos,  "Man  be  was  There i s a contains  R e c a l l , though, t h a t P r o t a g o r a s ' r e s o l u -  not doubt, d e s p a i r  and  i s the master of a l l t h i n g s .  cynicism. Man  has  He  prescribed  the a b i l i t y f o r  superior capacity f o r understanding."  In f a c t , one  of the f i r s t  of the  " e x i s t e n t i a l i s t " w r i t e r s can  seen t o have these same t h r e e themes running through most of h i s work. was  as  come  seems t o  i n v o l v e d i n the apprehension t h a t e v e r y t h i n g  t i o n of t h i s u n c e r t a i n t y was two  by most people who  I t a p p e a l s to some i n t u i t i o n that  universal.  i t s own  despair.  such r e l i g i o u s e x i s t e n t i a l i s t s  of e x i s t e n t i a l i s m has been f e l t  intellect  a  Buber.  with i t s voice.  tragedy of the  been t o f i n d  e a r l y i n h i s career  that F r e i d r i c h Nietzsche  i s s u e d h i s r e j e c t i o n of  be It the  world of f a c t s : L i f e no argument: We have arranged f o r o u r s e l v e s a world i n which we are a b l e to l i v e — w i t h the p o s t u l a t i o n of b o d i e s , l i n e s , s u r f a c e s , causes and e f f e c t s , motion and r e s t , form and c o n t e n t : without these a r t i c l e s of f a i t h nobody c o u l d now endure t o live'. But t h a t does not yet mean they are something proved and demonstrated. Ultimate scepticism: What; then i n the l a s t r e s o r t are the of mankind? They a r e the i r r e f u t a b l e e r r or s'of mankind . These words have not  o n l y a s i m i l a r message as t h a t propounded  P r o t a g o r a s so many y e a r s b e f o r e , style.  But  the  they a r e w r i t t e n i n a v i r t u a l l y  s i m i l a r i t y between P r o t a g o r a s and  Nietzche  or n o n - e x i s t e n c e i n order  used a s i m i l a r image:  God  i s dead.  by  identical  does not  P r o t a g o r a s used h i s statement of u n c e r t a i n t y c o n c e r n i n g existence  truths  end  here.  the gods'  t o emphasize h i s " s c e p t i c i s m " . Reading t h i s statement makes us  Nietzche shudder.  68  It  i s one  suggest of  God  t h i n g t o b e l i e v e t h a t God  does not e x i s t .  that he no l o n g e r e x i s t s because we  I t i s q u i t e another  have k i l l e d  him.  With the  to  death  comes the death of o r d e r , the death of reason, the r i s e of n i h i l i s m . H i s a t t i t u d e towards t r u t h l e d N i e t z c h e to emphasize the paradoxes  which he saw  a l l around him  i n the  world,  A l l N i e t z c h e ' s statements seem to be abrogated by o t h e r s . To be s e l f - c o n t r a d i c t o r y i s t h o r o u g h l y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of him. For every judgement one can n e a r l y always f i n d an o p p o s i t e judgement. I t seems as i f he has two o p i n i o n s about e v e r y t h i n g . ? [emphasis added"] Dissoi logoi. a s s e r t i n g , but opposing  N i e t z c h e devoted  many of h i s pages not merely  p a i n s t a k i n g l y f o r c i n g the reader to p e r c e i v e each of  r e a l i t i e s i n the But he was  world.  j u s t as v i v i d  i n h i s v i s i o n of how  Everyone, e v e r y t h i n g , has the w i l l t o power.  Man  t o escape from n i h i l i s m .  can o r d e r , can c o n t r o l  n a t u r e of h i s u n i v e r s e because of h i s p l a c e i n the u n i v e r s e . to  facts.  The  Superman.  He can conduct  way.  triumphant  c r y i s t h a t he can t r a n s c e n d man,  strive;  s u p e r i o r logos has become N i e t z c h e ' s That N i e t z c h e more i n t e r e s t i n g when we  should a s p i r e .  i s not a s l a v e stagnates  as  he can become  P r o t a g o r a s ' man  of  Superman.  so resembles the p r e - S o c r a t i c t r a d i t i o n i s made yet r e a l i z e t h a t , i n h i s study of c l a s s i c a l p h i l o l o g y i n  Roman l i t e r a t u r e , he was  c o n f r o n t e d w i t h the study of r h e t o r i c .  a c q u i r e d a c e n t r a l p o s i t i o n i n h i s study and of  the  h i s mastery of the u n i v e r s e i n a s u p e r i o r , a b e t t e r  I t i s t o t h i s he should  Greek and  He  F a i l i n g t o r e a l i z e h i s "mastery over a l l t h i n g s , " man  mere man.  the  Greek r h e t o r i c as w e l l as on r h e t o r i c  conducted  itself.  l e c t u r e s on the  It  history  T h i s f a s c i n a t i o n would  certainly  have brought him f a c e t o f a c e w i t h the work of the S o p h i s t s , but from a r h e t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e r a t h e r than from a l o g i c a l , a n a l y t i c p o i n t of view. not  so c a s u a l l y d i s m i s s t h e i r work i n the way  l e a r n e d to do, and  t h a t p h i l o s o p h y had  so c o u l d g a i n unique i n s p i r a t i o n from h i s  He would  long s i n c e  study.  69  Other c i r c u m s t a n c e s might have had.  i n t e r v e n e d t o dampen t h e i n f l u e n c e t h a t N i e t z c h e  F o r N i e t z c h e was not of h i s t i m e .  The mid t o l a t e n i n e t e e n t h  c e n t u r y was a t i m e of adherence t o t h e o l d r e l i g i o n s or of w h o l e s a l e to  the new ones of s c i e n c e and i n d u s t r y .  conversion  V i r t u a l l y no one e l s e was s a y i n g t h e  s o r t s of t h i n g s t h a t N i e t z c h e went on about.  Unable t o shake t h e dogma of  t r u t h , N i e t z c h e ' s w r i t i n g s and paradoxes appeared t o be t h e s h r i l l b a b b l i n g s of a madman c o n f r o n t e d by t h e t e r r o r s o f h i s own i n s a n i t y .  H i s concept  of t h e  w i l l t o power and h i s i d e a of supermen were c l e a r s i g n s o f megalomania. H i s subsequent l i n g e r i n g i n , an asylum due t o t h e ravages -  caused by s i n , v i n d i c a t e d h i s r e j e c t i o n .  of s y p h i l i s , madness  I t i s l i t t l e wonder t h a t h i s work  was u s e a b l e by t h o s e o t h e r madmen of Germany —  the N a z i s .  In their  aftermath,  the European t h i n k e r s r e v e r t e d t o t h e s t a n c e of d e s p a i r and n i h i l i s m t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e s so much e x i s t e n t i a l  thought.  The madness t h a t appears i n N i e t z c h e ' s w r i t i n g s needs more r e f l e c t i o n than c a n be g i v e n t o i t h e r e . was  F o r he w r e s t l e d w i t h t r u t h a t a t i m e when he  i t s s o l e a s s a i l a n t . T h i s , of n e c e s s i t y , caused a s t r a i n , a b r u i s e t h a t  p e r s i s t e d i n h i s s p i r i t u n t i l t h e end. S t i l l , much of h i s "madness" i s apparent eyes.  o n l y t o our t r u t h - o b s e s s e d  Once we have r e p u d i a t e d t h e P l a t o n i c v i s i o n , N i e t z c h e ' s b e g i n s t o l o s e  some of i t s appearance o f i n s a n i t y and a c q u i r e s an a u r a o f deep i n s i g h t .  It i s  the o t h e r v i e w t h a t b e g i n s t o f a l t e r and stammer, t o appear, f r a n k l y , q u i t e mad.  **  i i i **  S c i e n c e and s c i e n t i f i c thought never d i s p r o v e d i t s c r i t i c s , i t m e r e l y i g n o r e d them.  Thus, u n t i l q u i t e r e c e n t l y , t h e a d v o c a t e s  r a t i o n a l i t y have had v e r y l i t t l e p o s i t i v e impact  of a n o n - o b j e c t i v e  on t h e p h i l o s o p h y of s c i e n c e .  70  One  of the r e a s o n s f o r t h i s i s the v e r y common b e l i e f t h a t the o n l y way  r a t i o n a l i s to be l o g i c a l and o b j e c t i v e .  t o be  C r i t i c s of o b j e c t i v i t y have t h u s  tended t o d i s m i s s r a t i o n a l i t y and t o seek o t h e r , u s u a l l y a r t i s t i c modes of expression.  They, i n t u r n , have been d i s m i s s e d by o b j e c t i v i s t s f o r b e i n g  e m o t i o n a l and  irrational.  I t i s the theme of t h i s paper t h a t one can r e j e c t o b j e c t i v i t y , yet r e t a i n r a t i o n a l i t y .  T h i s i s because r a t i o n a l i t y i s more t h a n the  to use l o g i c , i t i n c l u d e s foremost the a b i l i t y t o use language. be used t o p r o v e , t o p l e a s e and poetry.  The  2000 y e a r s .  t o persuade.  The  first  ability  Language can  i s l o g i c and t h e second  t h i r d i s the one which has been m a l i g n e d and It i s rhetoric —  and  i g n o r e d f o r more t h a n  the c r a f t o f t h e S o p h i s t s and the r o o t of  r a t i o n a l i t y , u n t i l P l a t o turned  i t s power onto  itself.  R h e t o r i c i s p r e s e n t l y u n d e r g o i n g i t s f i r s t major r e v i v a l s i n c e the seventeenth old  c e n t u r y , and  the f i r s t t h a t has sought t o f u l l y r e s t o r e i t t o i t s  p o s i t i o n of r e s p e c t . I t must be c l e a r t h a t by " r h e t o r i c " I mean something more than t h e  o r n a m e n t a t i o n of speech or the a r t of the o r a t o r . of r h e t o r i c , but i t goes much f u r t h e r t h a n t h a t .  These a r e c e r t a i n l y p a r t s W r i t e r s on r h e t o r i c have  o f t e n f a l l e n i n t o the t r a p l a i d by S o c r a t e s f o r G o r g i a s . t a l k i n g about r h e t o r i c , s u r e l y i t must be d e f i n e d . w h i c h we  " B e f o r e we  begin  We must have a g u i d e by  can c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h t h a t which i s r h e t o r i c from t h a t w h i c h i s n o t ,  b e f o r e we can even c o n s i d e r i n v e s t i g a t i n g i t s v a l u e . " the f i c t i o n a l i z e d Gorgias  But some t h i n g s , as  found t o h i s c h a g r i n and embarrassment, a r e  i n c a p a b l e of p r e c i s e d e f i n i t i o n .  To P l a t o t h i s made them w o r t h l e s s ,  i n c a p a b l e of b e i n g i n c l u d e d w i t h i n t h e a r t of the  simply and  philosopher.  P l a t o would be r i g h t i f the o n l y g o a l of the p h i l o s o p h e r were t o seek t r u t h .  But, i f i t i s t o seek q u a l i t y , t h e n t h e need f o r c e r t a i n d e f i n i -  t i o n vanishes.  There a r e so many v a l u a b l e p a r t s of our l i v e s t h a t d e f y  71  d e f i n i t i o n , t h a t such a s t a t e of a f f a i r s Socrates?  What about a r t , S o c r a t e s ,  shouldn't s u r p r i s e u s .  or beauty?  What i s l o v e ,  None of t h e s e can be d e f i n e d .  P l a t o i s d r i v e n t o e i t h e r e l i m i n a t i n g them, or i m p l a u s i b l y d e f i n i n g them a s the s t r i v i n g  for truth.  Rhetoric It  A l l values  a r e one f o r P l a t o , but not f o r l i f e .  i s r e a l , but n o t c a p a b l e of c l e a r and p r e c i s e  can, however, be d e s c r i b e d  i n v a r i o u s ways.  definition.  T h i n g s can be s a i d about i t .  It most c e r t a i n l y i s p r i m a r i l y concerned w i t h speech, spoken and w r i t t e n , a l t h o u g h t h e r e a r e those who would i n c l u d e n o n - l i n g u i s t i c communications such as g e s t u r e s ,  the clenched  The is  core  fist  or the p r o t e s t march.  of r h e t o r i c i s i t s p e r s u a s i v e n e s s .  " t h e a r t of speaking c o n v i n c i n g l y and w e l l . "  argumentation:  Its classical  Rhetoric  definition  i s the t h e o r y of  "... they study of the d i s c u r s i v e t e c h n i q u e s a l l o w i n g us t o  induce or t o i n c r e a s e the mind's adherence t o the t h e s e s presented f o r i t s 3 assent."  Rhetoric  i s a verbal art.  I t concerns p u b l i c utterances  designed t o produce some k i n d of e f f e c t on other  people.  which a r e  I t i s t h e use of  4 language by s u b j e c t s informative  t o r e l a t e t o each o t h e r .  and suasory d i s c o u r s e "  than s c i e n t i f i c d e m o n s t r a t i o n . to  —  Rhetoric  i s the " r a t i o n a l e of  t h e s t r i v i n g f o r informed o p i n i o n  I t seeks t o " a d j u s t  rather  i d e a s t o p e o p l e and people  ideas. It  s t u d i e s how people come to b e l i e v e t h a t which they b e l i e v e , not  through immediate sense v e r i f i c a t i o n , but by i n f e r e n c e from t h e o p i n i o n s of others,  Perhaps my f a v o u r i t e d e f i n i t i o n i s the s h o r t e s t —  study of how people change each o t h e r ' s The  perception  mind and the world, reality. and  "Rhetoric  i s the  minds.  of r e a l i t y i s determined by the i n t e r a c t i o n of the  One who c a n change minds, c a n by t h a t f a c t a l o n e  influence  He escapes from t h e dilemma of o b j e c t i v i t y v e r s u s n i h i l i s m , by openly  a c t i v e l y imposing and a f f i r m i n g some v a l u a b l e v i s i o n of the u n i v e r s e .  72  The  power of language,  since a n t i q u i t y .  the magic of the word has been a p p r e c i a t e d  In an e a r l i e r c h a p t e r , I d e s c r i b e d the Greek b e l i e f  the use of language was  the source of the world of appearances.  language gave power over the world. w i t h the use of words, use of speech.  Power over  In most c u l t u r e s , magic was  The J u d a e o - C h r i s t i a n God  He spoke the words, and  i t was  performed  done.  that  associated  c r e a t i o n by the  Man's mastery  of the  world began w i t h Adam and Eve's t a s k of naming the a n i m a l s and p l a n t s . when God  And  became f l e s h , the word became C h r i s t , But w h i l e the use o f language by man  g i v e s him power over  t h i s does not mean t h a t r e a l i t y i s a r b i t r a r y or w h i m s i c a l . a r b i t r a r y although neither and v a l u a b l e .  i s i t necessary.  Language i s a covenant  t o use i t i n j u s t any way  he p l e a s e s .  Language i s not  It i s conventional, h i s t o r i c a l  An i n d i v i d u a l u s i n g language i s committing  ."supra-personal'.'.  reality,  himself to  between i t s u s e r s .  One  something  i s not  I f he t r i e s t o , no one w i l l  free  understand  him, and he w i l l no l o n g e r be speaking, but merely making n o i s e s . W i t h i n the commitment e n t a i l e d by the use of language, still  sufficient  there i s  l a t i t u d e f o r an i n d i v i d u a l t o develop h i s langauge,  p a r t i c i p a t e i n the world he shares w i t h those around  him.  to  R e a l i t y i s seen t o  be the shared v i s i o n of a community, where i t can v a r y between members and yet r e t a i n a common c o r e t h a t i s apprehended by n e a r l y a l l of them. T h i s i s a l l v e r y u n c l e a r , and d i f f i c u l t because  to describe.  This i s  of our d i f f i c u l t y i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o u r s e l v e s b o t h as complete  wholes  8 and as mere p a r t s of a. l a r g e r whole. e x i s t s on i t s own, of my  reality  i t s v a l u e s and we  I c r e a t e my  a separate e n t i t y , w i t h me  i s determined i t s history.  share the same r e a l i t y .  own  world.  i n the c e n t r e .  t o a g r e a t extent by my  My  reality  But the n a t u r e  language and my  culture,  To the e x t e n t t h a t many of us share these t h i n g s , To the extent t h a t we d i f f e r , we  occupy  different  73  worlds. reality.  By b r i n g i n g me t o change my v a l u e s and b e l i e f s , you b r i n g me t o change But t h e r e a l i t i e s t h a t a r e a v a i l a b l e , t h e range of p o s s i b l e c h o i c e s  i f you w i l l ,  i s itself  i n f l u e n c e d h i s t o r i c a l l y and c u l t u r a l l y .  R h e t o r i c i s the use of language t o a f f e c t accomplishes  t h i s t a s k by a f f i r m i n g and a p p e a l i n g t o v a l u e s .  the n a t u r e of t h e world ubiquitous.  t h e n a t u r e of r e a l i t y .  i n a l l a s p e c t s of human e x p e r i e n c e .  Values  It  determine  R h e t o r i c i s thus  I t i s not an i n c i d e n t a l or a c c i d e n t a l a d d i t i o n t o r a t i o n a l i t y , any  more than the apprehension  of q u a l i t y i n t h e world  i s a superfluous addition to  o b j e c t i v e knowledge. R h e t o r i c r e c o g n i z e s the s t r e n g t h of the f i c t i o n s men l i v e by, as w e l l as those they l i v e under, and i t aims t o f o r t i f y one and explode the o t h e r . R h e t o r i c aims a t what i s worth d o i n g , what i s worth t r y i n g . I t i s concerned w i t h v a l u e s , and v a l u e s a r e e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h the a i d of i m a g i n a t i v e r e a l i z a t i o n , n o t through r a t i o n a l d e t e r m i n a t i o n a l o n e ; and they g a i n t h e i r f o r c e through emotional animantion.9 It  i s t h e e c s t a t i c , emotional r e l e a s e which accompanies t h e contem-  p l a t i o n of n a t u r e t h a t m o t i v a t e s any d e s c r i p t i o n of the world  i n t e l l e c t u a l development.  The acceptance of  i s grounded upon a e s t h e t i c or moral v a l u e s .  This  p a s s i o n a t e , r h e t o r i c a l aspect of our knowledge i s b r i l l i a n t l y d e s c r i b e d by M i c h a e l P o l a n y i i n h i s landmark book P e r s o n a l Knowledge: Critical  Towards a Post  Philosophy.^ He d e f i n e s t h e g o a l of knowledge as " t h e apprehension  n a l i t y which commands our r e s p e c t and a r o u s e s L i k e Feyerabend, he argues of the Copernican  our c o n t e m p l a t i v e  of a r a t i o admiration."  t h a t i t was the a e s t h e t i c e x c e l l e n c e , t h e q u a l i t y  and E i n s t e i n i a n t h e o r i e s t h a t l e d t o t h e i r acceptance.  a c t o f knowing always i n v o l v e s an a p p r a i s a l , a statement t h a t l e a d s t o some view o f t h e world.  of v a l u e p r e f e r e n c e s  I t i s i n t h e acceptance  of t h i s a p p r a i s a l t h a t a t h e o r y or c l a i m i s accepted  The  or r e j e c t i o n  or r e j e c t e d .  Conversely,  74  i t i s by a p p e a l i n g  t o commonly h e l d v a l u e s and making arguments based on them  t h a t one g e t s o t h e r s t o see t h e v a l u e s  involved.  A s c i e n t i s t uses r h e t o r i c t o  get o t h e r s t o share h i s a p p r a i s a l . The of order  i n the universe.  has an order But  t a s k of i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y i s t h e i m p o s i t i o n and c o n t e m p l a t i o n Truth-oriented  philosophy  says t h a t t h e u n i v e r s e  independent of i t s p e r c e p t i o n , and our t a s k i s t o d i s c o v e r i t .  t h i s i s never what has been done.  We c r e a t e p l e a s i n g o r d e r s of t h e u n i -  v e r s e because d o i n g so s a t i s f i e s the p a s s i o n a t e  n a t u r e o f our i n t e l l e c t .  The  c r e a t i v e power of t h e p a i n t e r or poet i s t h e j o y o f t h e s c i e n t i s t or mathematician: A s c i e n t i f i c t h e o r y w h i c h c a l l s a t t e n t i o n t o i t s own b e a u t y , and p a r t l y r e l i e s on i t f o r c l a i m i n g t o r e p r e s e n t e m p i r i c a l r e a l i t y , i s a k i n t o a work o f a r t w h i c h c a l l s a t t e n t i o n t o i t s own b e a u t y a s a t o k e n of a r t i s t i c r e a l i t y . I t i s a k i n a l s o t o t h e m y s t i c a l cont e m p l a t i o n of n a t u r e : a k i n s h i p shown h i s t o r i c a l l y i n t h e P y t h a gorean o r i g i n s o f t h e o r e t i c a l s c i e n c e . More g e n e r a l l y , s c i e n c e , by v i r t u e of i t s p a s s i o n a t e n o t e , f i n d s i t s p l a c e among t h e g r e a t s j s t e m s of u t t e r a n c e s w h i c h t r y t o evoke and impose c o r r e c t modes of f e e l i n g . I n t e a c h i n g i t s own k i n d s of f o r m a l e x c e l l e n c e , s c i e n c e f u n c t i o n s l i k e a r t , r e l i g i o n , m o r a l i t y , l a w and o t h e r c o n s t i t u e n t s of c u l t u r e . I I [emphasis added] Does t h i s mean t h a t a l l s c i e n t i f i c t h e o r i e s a r e e q u a l , t h a t i s no r e a s o n f o r d e s i g n a t i n g Not a t a l l . being  The s u g g e s t i o n  there  some a s s u p e r i o r and o t h e r s a s s i m p l y f o o l i s h ? i s r a t h e r t h a t no t h e o r y  t r u e , or f o o l i s h because f a l s e .  i s s u p e r i o r by v i r t u e of  But some t h e o r i e s a r e c e r t a i n l y b e t t e r  than o t h e r s , j u s t as some p a i n t i n g s or some n o v e l s a r e s u p e r i o r t o o t h e r s . Arguments a r e sometimes made t h a t , because t h e r e i s no way of o b j e c t i v e l y proving  t h a t one p i e c e of a r t i s s u p e r i o r t o a n o t h e r , t h e r e f o r e  a l l such c l a i m s a r e m e r e l y t h e e x p r e s s i o n  of s u b j e c t i v e r e a c t i o n .  "This i s a  b e t t e r p a i n t i n g t h a n t h a t " means n o t h i n g more t h a n " I l i k e t h i s one b e t t e r that." others,  than  But no one i s e n t i t l e d t o say t h a t t h e t h i n g s they l i k e a r e b e t t e r t h a n To do so i s s n o b b i s h a t b e s t and a u t h o r i t a r i a n a t w o r s t .  75  T h i s argument, much a s i t a p p e a l s t o our e g a l i t a r i a n i n s t i n c t s , s i m p l y does n o t a c c o r d w i t h t h e way t h a t we do e x p e r i e n c e t h i n g s ,  In fact,  we do say t h a t Bach i s b e t t e r than d i s c o , t h a t Ingmar Berman i s a b e t t e r f i l m d i r e c t o r t h a n Russ Meyer, or t h a t F r e n c h wine i s b e t t e r t h a n B r i t i s h Columbian.  Everyone b e l i e v e s t h e s e s t a t e m e n t s o r some s t a t e m e n t s l i k e them.  How i s i t p o s s i b l e t o h o l d such b e l i e f s ,  and y e t n o t be compelled t o d e f i n e  quality objectively? A key i d e a i n s e p a r a t i n g  a p p r e h e n s i o n of a t h i n g ' s q u a l i t y f r o n one's 12  l i k i n g or d i s l i k i n g of i t , i s t h a t o f t h e c o n n o i s s e u r . Connoiseurs a r e experts i n t a s t e .  They a r e a u t h o r i t i e s i n f i e l d s  where t h e r e a r e no f a c t s upon w h i c h t o ground and j u s t i f y o p i n i o n s . people u n c r i t i c a l l y a c c e p t a l l t h e o p i n i o n s  of a l l connoisseurs.  Not many  But i t s t i l l  makes sense t o speak of t h e a u t h o r i t y of a c o n n o i s s e u r ' s o p i n i o n . 13 John Scharr of a u t h o r i t y .  described  some u s e f u l i n s i g h t s c o n c e r n i n g t h e concept  He d i s t i n g u i s h e s between two k i n d s of a u t h o r i t y .  There i s t h e  a u t h o r i t y t h a t compels someone t o do something by sheer f o r c e , t h e a u t h o r i t y of t h e l o a d e d gun, of c o e r c i o n and o f f e a r .  Quite d i f f e r e n t i s the a u t h o r i t y  possessed by an o l d e r and w i s e r f r i e n d , o r a f a t h e r , or a community e l d e r , or a teacher.  T h i s a u t h o r i t y f l o w s from r e s p e c t  e x p e r i e n c e and wisdom,  f o r t h a t person's  superior  I t i n v o l v e s f a i t h and commitment by t h e p e r s o n r e c o g -  n i z i n g t h e a u t h o r i t y , who acknowledges t h e a u t h o r i t y f r e e l y and w i t h o u t coercion. The of e x p e r t i s e .  l a t t e r i s t h e a u t h o r i t y e x e r c i s e d by t h e c o n n o i s s e u r i n h i s f i e l d How does a p e r s o n come t o be r e c o g n i z e d  as a connoisseur?  Not  s u r p r i s i n g l y , t h e r e i s no o b j e c t i v e or c e r t a i n t e s t by w h i c h we c a n s e p a r a t e the " r e a l " c o n n o i s s e u r from the p r e t e n d e r .  U s u a l l y , however, a c o n n o i s s e u r  w i l l be a p e r s o n w i t h a l a r g e amount o f e x p e r i e n c e w i t h whatever he i s a c o n -  noisseur o f . T h i s i s i n s t r u c t i v e , f o r i t i n d i c a t e s t h a t being a i s an a c q u i r e d  skill.  L i k e other s k i l l s ,  i t i s normally  acquired  p r a c t i c e and c o r r e c t i o n by another person w i t h t h a t s k i l l . can be formulated not  which d e s c r i b e t h e s k i l l ,  e n t a i l i t s possession  through  Even i f r u l e s  knowledge o f these r u l e s does  nor v i c e v e r s a .  We need the a u t h o r i t y of c o n n o i s s e u r s , ble  connoisseur  because we a r e simply  incapa  of a c q u i r i n g f i r s t h a n d knowledge of a l l t h a t we b e l i e v e . ... a s o c i e t y may be s a i d t o have a c u l t u r a l l i f e o n l y t o t h e extent t o which i t r e s p e c t s c u l t u r a l e x c e l l e n c e . As i n s c i e n c e , t h i s a p p r e c i a t i o n c a n r a r e l y be t h e e x p r e s s i o n of a f i r s t - h a n d judgement. The humanities, t h e a r t s , the v a r i o u s r e l i g i o n s , a r e a l l e x t e n s i v e and h i g h l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d aggregates of which no one can f u l l y understand and judge more than a t i n y f r a c t i o n . Yet each of us r e s p e c t s v e r y much l a r g e r a r e a s of these c u l t u r a l domains. I know f o r example t h a t Dante's D i v i n e Comedy i s a g r e a t poem though I have read v e r y l i t t l e of i t , and I r e s p e c t Beethoven's g e n i u s f o r music though I am almost deaf t o music. These a r e genuine second-hand a p p r e c i a t i o n s , formed i n the same way i n which s c i e n t i s t s a p p r e c i a t e the whole of s c i e n c e and i n which t h e p u b l i c f o l l o w s s u i t . I n d i r e c t a p p r e c i a t i o n s of t h i s k i n d a r e , a g a i n , t h e r o o t s through which s o c i e t y as a whole nurtures c u l t u r a l l i f e . By f o l l o w i n g t h e i r chosen i n t e l l e c t u a l l e a d e r s , the non-experts can even p a r t i c i p a t e up to, a p o i n t i n the works of these l e a d e r s and beyond t h i s i n t h e whole range of c u l t u r e a c c r e d i t e d by them.-'-^ Now, t o r e c o g n i z e a person as a c o n n o i s s e u r ,  to  agree w i t h him.  I f a connoisseur  c h o i c e of p o s s i b l e r e s p o n s e s . is  i s not n e c e s s a r i l y  advances a judgement, we have a l a r g e  We may agree w i t h him t h a t t h e o b j e c t i s good,  of h i g h q u a l i t y , and f i n d t h a t we l i k e i t . Or we may agree t h a t i t i s  good, but s t i l l d i s l i k e i t . music and B u s h m i l l s '  I r e c o g n i z e t h a t Ingmar B e r g m a n f i l m s , symphony  I r i s h whiskey a r e a l l v e r y good.  But I don't l i k e them.  T h i s i s i n no way i n c o n s i s t e n t . Or,  I could d i s a g r e e w i t h t h e judgement t h a t t h e o b j e c t i s good  (and l i k e i t o r n o t ) .  But, i f I d i s a g r e e w i t h a c o n n o i s s e u r ' s  judgement,  then t h e r e i s some s o r t o f onus upon me t o e i t h e r g i v e r e a s o n s f o r my_ o p i n i o n or e l s e show t h a t he i s not r e a l l y a c o n n o i s s e u r .  I f I choose the l a t t e r  77  c o u r s e , I am  showing t h a t h i s c l a i m s r e a l l y ought not t o have the a u t h o r i t y  which he c l a i m s f o r them.  Keep i n mind t h a t t h e r e i s no such onus i f I j u s t  d i s l i k e the o b j e c t i n q u e s t i o n , but do not o f f e r an o p i n i o n on i t s v a l u e . I n f a c t , b e i n g a c o n n o i s s e u r i s not a s t a t e w h i c h one attains.  suddenly  I t i s a continuum t h a t depends upon the l e v e l of a u t h o r i t y t h a t  one's o p i n i o n s command. authority.  As you a s s e r t your o p i n i o n s , you a r e c l a i m i n g  C o n n o i s s e u r s h i p must be r e c o g n i z e d  interpersonal. How  T h i s i s how  by o t h e r s .  I t i s of  necessity  i t t r a n s c e n d s mere s u b j e c t i v i t y .  does one c l a i m t h i s a u t h o r i t y ?  I a l r e a d y i n d i c a t e d one way  t o r e f e r t o one's e x t e n s i v e e x p e r i e n c e w i t h wine or p a i n t i n g or n o v e l s prima f a c i e c l a i m t o a u t h o r i t y . opinion.  Another way  sweetness w i t h c o l o u r and  Or, you might say, "The  I can t e l l  is a  that  b a l a n c e of bouquet  c l a r i t y makes t h i s a good w i n e . "  j u s t say, " I am a c o n n o i s s e u r and  —  i s t o g i v e r e a s o n s f o r your  You might say, " I ' v e t a s t e d hundreds of wines and  t h i s i s an e x c e l l e n t one."  this  t h i s i s a good w i n e . "  You  and  couldn't  That i s , you  could,  but your c l a i m would not have much a u t h o r i t y . A connoisseur i s said to appreciate and  perhaps a r b i t r a r y .  " A p p r e c i a t i o n " i s not  and based upon r e a s o n s , It and  quality.  subjective, i t i s interpersonal  I t i s not o b j e c t i v e , but n e i t h e r i s i t i r r a t i o n a l .  i s a s k i l l t h a n can be a c q u i r e d ,  t h a t can be t a u g h t .  " l i k i n g " are q u i t e d i f f e r e n t , they can be r e l a t e d .  I appreciate.(and (and v i c e v e r s a ) .  v i c e versa)  —  While " a p p r e c i a t i n g " I do tend t o l i k e  I tend t o d i s l i k e what I don't  things  appreciate  But t h i s r e l a t i o n i s not n e c e s s a r y , i s r a r e l y s t a b l e , and  can be a f f e c t e d by my  will.  When a c o n n o i s s e u r a p p r e c i a t e s a p p r e c i a t i n g i s the craftsmanship Another way  "Liking" i s subjective,  the q u a l i t y of something, what he i s  t h a t went i n t o the c r e a t i o n of t h e t h i n g .  of s e e i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the c r a f t s m a n and  the  connoisseur  is this:  A c r a f t s m a n i s c a p a b l e of d o i n g something w i t h t h e q u a l i t y w h i c h a  c o n n o i s s e u r can a p p r e c i a t e .  C l e a r l y everybody i s a c r a f t s m a n t o the e x t e n t  t h e y perform a s k i l l w e l l , a c o n n o i s s e u r t o the e x t e n t t h e y can a p p r e c i a t e a w e l l performed  skill.  S c i e n c e i s i n c a p a b l e of d e s i g n i n g a S t r a d i v a r i u s v i o l i n , or d i s t i n g u i s h i n g t h e q u a l i t y of i t s sound.  There i s no o b j e c t i v e t e s t f o r q u a l i t y .  That does not make q u a l i t y any l e s s r e a l .  I n f a c t , i t i s j u s t t h e k i n d of  a p p r e c i a t i o n t h a t l i e s a t t h e c o r e of s c i e n t i f i c r a t i o n a l i t y . i s a p p r e c i a t e d and advocated  When a t h e o r y  by a s c i e n t i s t , i t i s h i s e x p e r i e n c e and  familiar  i t y w i t h h i s a r e a t h a t g i v e s him t h e a b i l i t y t o a p p r e c i a t e the a e s t h e t i c , f u l f i l l i n g v i r t u e s of t h e t h e o r y .  A s c i e n t i f i c innovator i s a craftsman.  He  d e s i g n s h i s t h e o r i e s so t h a t t h e y w i l l be a p p r e c i a t e d by t h e community of scientific  connoisseurs. Now,  because s c i e n c e i s a h i s t o r i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n , t h e r e a r e c e r t a i n  v i r t u e s t h a t a r e c o n v e n t i o n a l l y a c c e p t e d as v e r y i m p o r t a n t .  These i n c l u d e  e l e g a n c e , s i m p l i c i t y , c o n s i s t e n c y , f r u i t f u l n e s s , et c e t e r a .  But, r a t h e r t h a n  v i e w i n g t h e s e c r i t e r i a as a e s t h e t i c d i m e n s i o n s , has enthroned  Platonically inspired  them as o b j e c t i v e g u a r a n t o r s of t r u t h .  science  P a u l K. Feyerabend's  s u g g e s t i o n i s t h a t o t h e r v a l u e s be r e c o g n i z e d i n o r d e r t h a t more t h e o r i e s be generated and our e x p e r i e n c e deepened and  enriched.  Suppose t h e p o e t i c i n s t i t u t i o n s t i p u l a t e d t h a t a l l poems must have c e r t a i n f o r m a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s or be w o r t h l e s s . o n l y symphony was v a l u a b l e ,  Or t h a t music d i c t a t e d t h a t  Or t h a t p a i n t i n g d e n i e d any v i r t u e t o s u r r e a l i s m  or r e a l i s m f o r t h a t m a t t e r . We v i e w such a t t e m p t s when t h e y occur as a u t h o r i t a r i a n s t i f l i n g of the c r e a t i v e impulse. sterility.  Yet we  We f e a r t h a t i t l e a d s t o a r t i s t i c impoverishment and  t o l e r a t e t h i s v e r y a u t h o r i t a r i a n i s m i n s c i e n c e , i n much  79  p h i l o s o p h y and, y e s , i n law. s t e r i l i t y , y e t we p e r s i s t . The  connoisseur  We  s h o u l d f e a r i n t e l l e c t u a l impoverishment and  Why?  W e l l , because of t r u t h .  i s the man  f o r a g r e a t e r or deeper e x p e r i e n c e . t h a t n o v i c e s cannot.  of s u p e r i o r l o g o s .  He has the c a p a c i t y  A wine c o n n o i s s e u r can d e t e c t f l a v o u r s  A b a l l e t c o n n o i s s e u r c a n see movements and elements of  beauty t h a t do not e x i s t f o r a p e r s o n who  has no f a m i l i a r i t y with:.:the dance.  A hockey f a n sees e x c i t i n g p l a y s and e x h i b i t i o n s of s k i l l t h a t a r e i n v i s i b l e t o the f i r s t - t i m e s p e c t a t o r ,  A s c i e n t i s t sees s c i e n t i f i c v a l u e and importance i n .  theory that i s incomprehensible the lawyer —  t o someone who  has n o t had h i s t r a i n i n g .  And  he sees j u s t i c e i n a d e c i s i o n t h a t seems u n j u s t on t h e s u r f a c e ,  he can a p p r e c i a t e l e g a l v a l u e  ...  B e f o r e I approach t h i s p o i n t any f u r t h e r , I should summarize my argument t h u s f a r , i n t h e hope of e s t a b l i s h i n g some k i n d of o r d e r . There i s no such t h i n g as o b j e c t i v i t y . t h i n g i s c h a o t i c and v a l u e l e s s .  For man  T h i s does not mean t h a t e v e r y -  has the power t o impose o r d e r upon t h e  universe. He does t h i s t h r o u g h the use of language.  Language g i v e s man  power  t o c r e a t e the w o r l d w h i c h i s p e r c e i v e d .  Language e n a b l e s i t s u s e r s t o i n f l u e n c e  the way  I t makes t h e c r e a t i o n of t h e u n i v e r s e  t h a t o t h e r s p e r c e i v e the w o r l d .  a communal, c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t y . purely subjective,  Because language i s shared by many, i t i s not  S i m i l a r l y , t h e a b i l i t y t o i n f l u e n c e r e a l i t y by means of  language i s not a b s o l u t e , or w i t h o u t bounds. people can be persuaded o f .  I t i s l i m i t e d t o the t h i n g s that  R h e t o r i c i s the use of language t o persuade  t o see the w o r l d i n a g i v e n way.  I t c o n c e r n s v a l u e s and t h e e f f e c t of v a l u e s  on our p e r c e p t i o n s and t h e r e f o r e our d e c i s i o n s .  By a p p e a l i n g t o commonly h e l d  v a l u e s and b e l i e f s , i t t r a n s c e n d s mere s u b j e c t i v i t y . but c e r t a i n l y not o b j e c t i v e .  people  It i s "intersubjective",  80  Because v a l u e s a r e n o r m a l l y h e l d i n common, communities have " e x p e r t s " i n t h e v a l u e s of v a r i o u s a r e a s of endeavour. can a l s o be t a u g h t ,  E x p e r t i s e c a n be a c q u i r e d , i t  Thus, p e o p l e ' s a b i l i t y t o impose o r d e r on t h e w o r l d c a n  be improved or enhanced.  The c r i t e r i a f o r whether t h i s has o c c u r r e d a r e  determined by t h e r e c o g n i z e d a u t h o r i t i e s i n a g i v e n f i e l d .  These e x p e r t s c a n  be c h a l l e n g e d , but t h i s r e q u i r e s g i v i n g r e a s o n s , a p p e a l i n g t o v a l u e s , b e i n g persuasive,  R h e t o r i c i s t h u s a l w a y s used t o e s t a b l i s h a new v i s i o n o r t h e o r y ,  as w e l l as t o defend an o l d one.  I t i s i n t i m a t e l y connected t o c o n n o i s s e u r s h i p ,  to a u t h o r i t y , to superior logos. Something i s made more v a l u a b l e by people c h o o s i n g more v a l u a b l e .  T h i s c h o i c e i s n o t a r b i t r a r y or i r r a t i o n a l .  to consider i t I t i s t i e d to  o t h e r v a l u e s —• c u l t u r a l and p e r s o n a l , h i s t o r i c , p s y c h o l o g i c a l and s o c i o l o g i c a l . The  c h o i c e i s always t h e r e .  Sometimes i t i s more c o n s c i o u s , sometimes l e s s .  R h e t o r i c seeks t o move i t s audience t o choose c e r t a i n v a l u e s and t o o r d e r t h e world a c c o r d i n g l y . ethical.  By s e e k i n g t o order t h e w o r l d v a l u a b l y , i t i s i n h e r e n t l y  By u s i n g language and r e a s o n s t o b r i n g t h i s about, i t i s i n h e r e n t l y  rational. S c i e n t i f i c thought p o s i t e d i t s v a l u e on t h e b a s i s of i t s r e f u s a l t o consider v a l u e s , but only t r u t h .  R h e t o r i c a l thought p o s i t s i t s v a l u e on t h e  b a s i s of i t s avowal t o stem from and a p p e a l t o our a p p r e c i a t i o n o f q u a l i t y , of value.  **  **  Many pages ago, I asked how t h e l a w c o u l d be v a l u a b l e i f i t was i m p o s s i b l e f o r i t t o be o b j e c t i v e .  I went on t o show t h a t n o t o n l y t h e l a w ,  but a l l o t h e r a r e a s of human endeavour, i n c l u d i n g s c i e n c e , a r e of n e c e s s i t y non*-objective, n o n r - l o g i c a l . Must we c o n c l u d e f r o m t h i s t h a t r a t i o n a l i t y  81  ... i s e n t i r e l y incompetent i n those a r e a s which elude c a l c u l a t i o n and t h a t , where n e i t h e r experiment nor l o g i c a l d e d u c t i o n i s i n a p o s i t i o n to f u r n i s h the s o l u t i o n of a problem we can but abandon o u r s e l v e s to i r r a t i o n a l f o r c e s , i n s t i n c t s , s u g g e s t i o n , or even violence?15 Such a f e a r i s o n l y j u s t i f i e d the r i g h t answer,  But  i f r a t i o n a l i t y i s l i m i t e d to  I have proposed t h a t we  seeking  see r a t i o n a l i t y r a t h e r as a  quest f o r q u a l i t y , the s e a r c h f o r , the best answer.  Logic i s reasoning  to t r u t h .  I t i s the path which  R h e t o r i c i s r e a s o n i n g devoted  both a b s o l u t e c e r t a i n t y , and Law answer.  The  to value.  the r i g h t answer.  skirts  a b s o l u t e doubt.  i s v a l u a b l e t o the extent t h a t i t seeks, and belief  devoted  i n o b j e c t i v i t y e n t a i l e d the b e l i e f  f i n d s , the b e s t  t h a t the b e s t answer  The r i g h t answer must be found w i t h c e r t a i n t y , w i t h  V a l u e s a r e s u b j e c t to n e i t h e r c e r t a i n t y nor l o g i c .  was  logic.  T h e r e f o r e they c o u l d not  p l a y any r o l e i n l e g a l d e c i s i o n making. Of c o u r s e t h i s i s not s t r i c t l y t r u e .  Values  such as c e r t a i n t y ,  p r e d i c t a b i l i t y and c o n s i s t e n c y a r e c o n s t a n t l y c i t e d and decisions.  These a r e the v a l u e s of s c i e n c e .  a r e the most important,  or the o n l y v a l u e s .  The  g i v e n as reasons f o r  error i s thinking that  In c l a i m i n g t h a t the law  s c i e n t i f i c , by a p p e a l i n g t o t h e s e s o r t s of v a l u e s , the law was I t was  establishing  i t s own  being  these  was rhetorical.  v a l u e by a p p e a l i n g to the commonly h e l d v a l u e s of  science. The  t r o u b l e i s , of c o u r s e , the s c i e n t i f i c v a l u e s a r e not the o n l y , nor  the most important a r e important t h e r e i s no  v a l u e s t h a t we  have.  I have s a i d t h a t the s c i e n t i f i c  because they tend t o a t t a i n the u l t i m a t e v a l u e —  such t h i n g as o b j e c t i v e t r u t h .  value at a l l .  But  I keep r e p e a t i n g t h i s s t r a n g e c l a i m ,  i n the hope t h a t i t becomes more p l a u s i b l e as I proceed. common e x p e r i e n c e , though, we  truth.  values  I f we  t u r n to our  can e a s i l y see t h a t t r u t h i s not our u l t i m a t e  There a r e commonly h e l d b e l i e f s t h a t the t r u t h should not  be  82  pursued i n every s i t u a t i o n .  I t i s m o r a l f o r a p e r s o n t o l i e i n o r d e r t o spare  another n e e d l e s s p a i n , f o r example not t o t e l l a c h i l d about t h e d e a t h of h i s or her p a r e n t s .  I t i s o f t e n a c c e p t a b l e , and e x p e c t e d , t o complement a person's  d r e s s or c o o k i n g , when you r e a l l y don't c a r e f o r e i t h e r . we c a l l i t .  convention",  I t i s o f t e n a c c e p t a b l e and expected t o l i e i n order t o p r o t e c t a  f r i e n d or r e l a t i v e .  I t i s c e r t a i n l y a c c e p t a b l e , and e x p e c t e d , f o r a  s o l d i e r t o l i e t o h i s enemy c a p t o r s . patriotism.  "Social  captured  Kindness, e t i q u e t t e , l o y a l t y , love,  A l l a r e v i r t u e s w h i c h can,  i n c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n s , outrank the  v a l u e of t r u t h . Because t h e law c l a i m s i t makes i t s d e c i s i o n s o l e l y on t h e b a s i s of t r u t h and l o g i c , two u n d e s i r a b l e e f f e c t s o f t e n o c c u r .  The c o u r t makes a  d e c i s i o n i n such a way as t o undermine v a l u e s w h i c h most p e o p l e h o l d more d e a r l y than t r u t h i n the given s i t u a t i o n .  (The C a n a d i a n e v i d e n t i a r y r u l e t h a t  a c c e p t s e v i d e n c e no m a t t e r how i t was o b t a i n e d , r e s u l t s i n many such d e c i s i o n s , )  i f i t i s r e l e v a n t and r e l i a b l e ,  Or t h e c o u r t makes a d e c i s i o n on t h e b a s i s  of v a l u e s other t h a n o b j e c t i v e ones, but g i v e s i t s r e a s o n s a s though t h e d e c i s i o n r e a l l y were o b j e c t i v e and v a l u e - f r e e . reasoning,  T h i s l e a d s t o t a n g l e d and f o o l i s h  o b f u s c a t i o n and concealment of t h e r e a l d e t e r m i n i n g  l a y s t h e c o u r t wide open t o charges of h y p o c r i s y .  v a l u e s , and  B o t h of t h e s e s i t u a t i o n s  r e s u l t i n t h e i n c r e a s e of c y n i c i s m towards t h e l a w , and t h e d e c r e a s e o f i t s perceived  value. Law i s v a l u a b l e t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t s d e c i s i o n s a r e j u s t .  e f f o r t and energy has been spent a t t e m p t i n g  t o d e f i n e j u s t i c e , t h a t i t appears  t o be one of t h e most d i f f i c u l t and e l u s i v e c o n c e p t s we have. to define j u s t i c e ,  I do not i n t e n d  But I s h a l l p o i n t out t h a t i t i s t h e q u a l i t y t h a t we see  i n d e c i s i o n s t h a t we agree w i t h . for  So much  I f we have been persuaded by t h e r e a s o n s g i v e n  a d e c i s i o n , we say t h a t i t i s j u s t .  I f we have not been persuaded (and we  don't agree w i t h t h e d e c i s i o n f o r other r e a s o n s ) t h e n we say t h a t i t i s u n j u s t .  83  The n o t i o n t h a t j u s t i c e i s connected i s not a new  one.  w i t h the r e a s o n s f o r d e c i s i o n  I t i s e x a c t l y t h i s w h i c h l e a d s us t o d e s c r i b e t h e  f o r a d e c i s i o n as i t s j u s t i f i c a t i o n .  Now,  reasons  where the o n l y i d e a l s of t h e  law  a r e those of o b j e c t i v i t y , r e f e r e n c e t o t h e r u l e s and t h e i r l o g i c a l d e r i v a t i o n becomes the s o l e means of j u s t i f i c a t i o n .  T h i s stems from t h e b e l i e f t h a t  j u s t d e c i s i o n s a r e those made i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h c l e a r and o b j e c t i v e r u l e s . I t has been d e s c r i b e d a s the p r i n c i p l e of f o r m a l j u s t i c e .  Unfortunately,  t h i s b e l i e f g i v e s us no grounds f o r d e t e r m i n i n g whether t h e r u l e i t s e l f i s just.  Furthermore,  s i n c e most cases t u r n , not m e r e l y  on t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of  a r u l e , but r a t h e r on i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n or c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n , l o g i c a l i n g and f o r m a l j u s t i c e f a i l  i n t h e i r attempt  reason-  t o j u s t i f y the d e c i s i o n .  Yet l e g a l judgements o f t e n a r e p e r s u a s i v e , t h e y do persuade us t h a t the d e c i s i o n i s j u s t .  Stephen T o u l m i n has e x p l o r e d t h i s w i t h h i s a n a l y s i s of  moral reasoning, T o u l m i n has p o i n t e d out t h a t i n t h e f i e l d of l a w - c o u r t argument, l a w y e r s and judges have developed t h e i r own p a t t e r n s and r u l e s of r a t i o n a l a c t i v i t y , f o r w h i c h t h e f i e l d of r e f e r e n c e i s t h e i r own f i e l d of p r a c t i c e . The law has found t h a t a c c e p t a b l e and w o r k a b l e s t a n d a r d s of r a t i o n a l proof e x i s t w i t h o u t b e i n g s y l l o g i s t i c a l l y proper and i n d u c t i v e l y p e r f e c t . J u s t i c e i s b e l i e v e d t o be s e r v e d . 17 [emphasis added]] T o u l m i n and most o t h e r w r i t e r s on " l e g a l l o g i c " , seem t o t h i n k t h a t l e g a l r e a s o n i n g i s r a t i o n a l t o the e x t e n t t h a t i t measures up t o i t s own s t a n d a r d s of l o g i c , w h i c h may  d i f f e r from o t h e r "more r i g o r o u s " t y p e s of l o g i c .  What t h e y don't a p p r e c i a t e i s t h a t law i s not j u s t t o t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h i t measures up t o some s t a n d a r d of r a t i o n a l i t y , r a t h e r i t i s r a t i o n a l t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t persuades people t h a t i t i s j u s t . r e n t l y on a p p e a l t o v a r i o u s v a l u e s . but r h e t o r i c a l .  Such p e r s u a s i o n r e s t s i n h e -  C o n s i d e r a t i o n of v a l u e s i s not  logical,  T h e r e f o r e law i s j u s t , law i s v a l u a b l e because i t i s r h e t o r i c a l .  84  R h e t o r i c seeks t o persuade o t h e r s t o make a c e r t a i n d e c i s i o n . I t does t h i s by a p p e a l i n g t o v a l u e s t h a t a r e h e l d by, o r c a n be induced and a m p l i f i e d i n t h e audience. r h e t o r i c c o u l d be reduced for a l l occasions."  I t would be a m i s t a k e though, t o t h i n k t h a t t o a s e t of r u l e s , or t r i c k s .  "Means t o persuade  P e r s u a s i o n i s always t h e i n t e r a c t i o n between r e a l , unique  people i n r e a l , u n i q u e s i t u a t i o n s .  I t i s almost never u n i v e r s a l ; i t i s n o t  c a p a b l e of f o r m a l i z a t i o n . The i n c o m p l e t e n e s s of t h e image of man a s a c r e a t u r e who should make use of f o r m a l r e a s o n o n l y c a n be demonstrated i n another way. I t i s a t r u i s m t h a t l o g i c i s a s u b j e c t w i t h o u t a s u b j e c t m a t t e r . That i s t o s a y , l o g i c i s a s e t of r u l e s and d e v i c e s t h a t a r e a p p l i c a b l e whatever t h e d a t a . As t h e s c i e n c e of t h e forms Of r e a s o n i n g , i t i s a means of i n t e r p r e t i n g and u t i l i z i n g t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r s of t h e v a r i o u s f i e l d s w h i c h do have t h e i r proper c o n t e n t s . F a c t s from s c i e n c e or h i s t o r y or l i t e r a t u r e f o r example, may s e r v e i n t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of an i n d u c t i v e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n . S i m i l a r f a c t s may be f e d i n t o a s y l l o g i s m . L o g i c i s m e r e l y t h e mechanism f o r o r g a n i z i n g t h e d a t a of o t h e r p r o v i n c e s of knowledge. Now i t f o l l o w s from t h i s t r u t h t h a t i f a man c o u l d c o n v e r t h i m s e l f i n t o a pure l o g i c machine o r t h i n k i n g machine, he would have no s p e c i a l r e l a t i o n t o any body of knowledge. A l l would be g r i s t f o r h i s m i l l as t h e p h r a s e goes, He would have no i n c l i n a t i o n , no p a r t i a l i t y , no p a r t i c u l a r a f f e c t i o n . H i s mind would work upon one t h i n g a s i n d i f f e r e n t l y as upon a n o t h e r . He would be an e v i s c e r a t e d c r e a t u r e , or a d e p a s s i o n a t e d one, s t a n d i n g i n t h e same r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e r e a l i t i e s of t h e w o r l d as t h e t h i n k i n g t e c h n i q u e stands t o t h e d a t a on w h i c h i t i s employed. He would be a t h i n k i n g r o b o t , a concept w h i c h h o r r i f i e s us p r e c i s e l y because t h e r o b o t has n o t h i n g t o t h i n k about. A c o n f i r m a t i o n of t h i s t r u t h l i e s i n the f a c t t h a t r h e t o r i c can never be reduced t o symbology. L o g i c i s i n c r e a s i n g l y becoming " s y m b o l i c l o g i c ; " t h a t i s i t s tendency. But r h e t o r i c always comes t o us i n w e l l - f l e s h e d words, and t h a t i s because i t must d e a l w i t h t h e w o r l d , t h e t h i c k n e s s , s t u b b o r n e s s , and power of i t . 1 8 R h e t o r i c i s t h e way i n w h i c h we i n s e r t content i n t o our r e a s o n i n g . I t i s i r o n i c t h a t l o g i c a l thought,  i n i t s s i n g l e minded d e v o t i o n t o t r u t h ,  i s o l a t e d i t s e l f from t h e v e r y w o r l d c o n c e r n i n g w h i c h i t sought  understanding.  T h i s i s seen c l e a r l y i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n of f o r m a l j u s t i c e o f f e r e d by J . C. Smith: Any judgement made i n r e g a r d t o a p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n , t h a t a p a r t i c u l a r person i s or i s not l e g a l l y o b l i g a t e d t o do a p a r t i c u l a r a c t , l o g i c a l l y e n t a i l s t h a t t h e judgement i n s t a n c e s a r u l e o f l a w such t h a t anyone i n a r e l e v a n t l y s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n i s o r i s not l e g a l l y o b l i g a t e d t o do the same a c t ... The p r i n c i p l e of u n i v e r s a l i z a b i l i t y e n t a i l s t h a t : What i s r i g h t f o r A must be r i g h t f o r B, g r a n t e d r e l e v a n t l y s i m i l a r c i r c u m s t a n c e s . 1 9  85  Terrific. ment have y i e l d e d  More than 2000 y e a r s of i n t e l l e c t u a l ,  this "truth".  s i t u a t i o n s i n the same way. similar" situations.  But t h e world does n o t c o n t a i n  of t h e p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e l l e c t ,  a tree.  Now,  "relevantly  " S i m i l a r i t y " i s the r e s u l t  s u r e l y we can a l l agree t h a t  there i s  A f t e r a l l , a b a l l _is l i k e a b a l l , and a t r e e  But b a l l s a r e a l s o s i m i l a r t o r o c k s ,  tumbleweeds, and t o f r i g h t e n e d  similar  things  p o r c u p i n e s and t o hundreds of other  things.  rock, or a paper weight, or ...  Oh.  I s the b a l l r e l e v a n t l y s i m i l a r t o a  I suppose i f a b a l l were found i n a b o t t l e  of g i n g e r b e e r , i t might be r e l e v a n t l y s i m i l a r t o a s n a i l .  we remember t h a t  You  Smith a s s u r e s u s , you o n l y have to t r e a t r e l e v a n t l y  i n the same way.  b o t t l e of whiskey.  like  and t o paperweights, and t o  I can't t r e a t b a l l s the same way a s a l l of these things.' don't have t o , P r o f e s s o r  develop-  J u s t i c e means t r e a t i n g " r e l e v a n t l y s i m i l a r "  I t c o n t a i n s o n l y chaos.  s i m i l a r i t y i n the w o r l d .  objective  Or a g l a s s of m i l k .  The head s p i n s .  t h e law doesn't o n l y c o n s i d e r  easy t h i n g s  Maybe even i n a P a r t i c u l a r l y when l i k e b a l l s , and  t r e e s , and weapons, and p o s s e s s i o n , i t a l s o d e a l s w i t h r i g h t s , and d u t i e s and  privileges,  How do we even d e t e c t  s t r u c t s upon c o n s t r u c t s ,  t h e s i m i l a r i t i e s between these con-  l e t a l o n e t e l l which ones a r e r e l e v a n t ?  head boggles f o r a w h i l e , and then, l i k e so many t h a t c o n s i d e r just  shuts i t s e l f The  The  spinning  these problems,  off.  world does not c o n t a i n  "relevantly similar" situations.  These  always i n v o l v e the c h o i c e of some way of s t r u c t u r i n g the w o r l d , t h e i m p o s i t i o n of some o r d e r , the p u r s u i t can never be o b j e c t i v e .  of some v a l u e s .  Detecting  t r e a t i n g the same s i t u a t i o n i n the same way. i s rather  similarity"  'It must always i n v o l v e b e l i e f s and p a s s i o n s .  i s e x a c t l y here t h a t the r e a l d e c i s i o n takes p l a c e .  of a d e c i s i o n  "relevant  No one argues  Yet i t  against  E v e r y c h a l l e n g e to t h e j u s t i c e  whether the s i t u a t i o n s a r e s i m i l a r or n o t .  Every  86  l e g a l judgement amounts t o a j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t r e a t i n g t h i s c a s e as though i t were more r e l e v a n t l y s i m i l a r t o t h i s one,  t h a n t o t h a t one.  i d e n t i f y r e l e v a n t s i m i l a r i t y , t h e y presuppose i t .  T h i s i s why  R u l e s cannot r u l e s work  w e l l i n easy c a s e s , where everyone a g r e e s about r e l e v a n t s i m i l a r i t y , and a t a l l i n hard c a s e s , where q u e s t i o n s  of j u s t i c e a r e  not  invoked.  Smith's d e s c r i p t i o n of f o r m a l j u s t i c e t e l l s us e x a c t l y n o t h i n g  about  j u s t i c e , because i t can o n l y be invoked a f t e r the d e c i s i o n has been made. seems t o t h i n k t h a t we a p p r e c i a t e  law f o r i t s f o r m a l , l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .  T h a t ' s where he t h i n k s j u s t i c e l i e s .  I t h i n k t h a t t h i s i s e x a c t l y wrong.  appreciate  law f o r the i n t i m a t e way  passions.  J u s t i c e i s the q u a l i t y p e r c e i v e d One  i n w h i c h i t a f f e c t s our l i v e s and i n the  We  our  law.  of the unhappy e f f e c t s of the b e l i e f t h a t the law i s not con-  cerned w i t h the r e a l , unique f e a t u r e s of s i t u a t i o n s , but o n l y w i t h mythical, formal, objective aspects, or f o r g o t t e n .  He  i s that important values are  the displaced  Wexler mentions a case w h i c h i s m e r e l y a good example of a  l a m e n t a b l y common s i t u a t i o n .  An e l d e r l y woman b o a r d i n g a bus f e l l and  h e r s e l f when the d r i v e r s t a r t e d away too suddenly. the b a s i s of whether her s e n i o r c i t i z e n ' s pass was "What happened t o the o l d l a d y ? " Wexler a s k s ,  "The  The  case was  hurt  decided  on  a c o n t r a c t , or a l i c e n s e . bus d r i v e r ' s n a s t i n e s s ,  20 the bus?"  These have a l l v a n i s h e d i n t o t h e l i m b o r e s e r v e d  for irrelevant  similarities. Such c a s e s appear u n j u s t p r e c i s e l y because we have not been p e r suaded t h a t the f e a t u r e s c o n c e n t r a t e d  on a r e t h e r e l e v a n t ones, or  those i g n o r e d  law s i m p l y proceeds i n i t s o b j e c t i v i s t  way,  should  be i g n o r e d .  The  that  because of i t s n a i v e f a i t h i n p s e u d o - s c i e n t i f i c g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s : As someone has r e c e n t l y p o i n t e d out, i t was not m e r e l y t h e a p p l e w h i c h f e l l w i t h Newton. An a p p l e r e a d y t o f a l l i s presumably r i p e , s h a p e l y , c o l o u r e d , t e x t u r e d , and p o t e n t i a l l y t a s t y . But  87  t h e s e 'secondary' t r a i t s a r e p r e c i s e l y those t h e legend i g n o r e s ... A l s o lowered was man's c a p a c i t y f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h i s f r u i t of the e a r t h n o t m e r e l y a s an example of mass d e s c e n d i n g , b u t a l s o as an item of sustenance and of s e n s o r y enjoyment.21 By o b s e s s i v e l y p u r s u i n g an o b j e c t i v e v i s i o n of r a t i o n a l i t y , t h e law d e c r e a s e s i t s c a p a c i t y f o r b e i n g r e l e v a n t t o r e a l human v a l u e s and c o n c e r n s . I f i t i s t o a s p i r e t o the v a l u e i t r e q u i r e s t o a v o i d becoming w h o l l y  coercive  and a r b i t r a r y , i t must commence t o o p e n l y d e c l a r e i t s n a t u r e a s v a l u e  laden,  j u s t and r h e t o r i c a l .  I have been a r g u i n g t h a t we should  see t h a t t h e l a w i s v a l u a b l e ,  not t o t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h i t i s o b j e c t i v e and l o g i c a l , b u t r a t h e r t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t i s " i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e " and p e r s u a s i v e . stop p r e t e n d i n g  I t should,  therefore,  and o p e n l y d e c l a r e i t s e l f t o be based upon p e r s o n a l  value  judgements and r h e t o r i c a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n .  There w i l l be a tremendous r e l u c -  tance t o t a k e t h i s s u g g e s t i o n  P a r t o f t h i s i s because o f t h e  seriously.  c l i n g i n g t o t r u t h t o w h i c h I have so o f t e n a l l u d e d . the f e a r w h i c h p e o p l e have of r h e t o r i c .  But much of i t i s due t o  I t i s probably  i n e v i t a b l e t h a t we  w i l l f e a r those who have power, because we cannot be sure t h a t t h e y w i l l e x e r c i s e t h i s power i n a way w h i c h i s b e n e f i c i a l t o u s .  I t was p r e c i s e l y  t h i s f e a r w h i c h l e d P l a t o t o e l e v a t e l o g i c above r h e t o r i c so many y e a r s ago (and t h e r e b y  a p p r o p r i a t e t h e power f o r t h e "good  Gary C r o n k h i t e  guys").  s t a t e s t h e c h a r g e , and h i s answer t o i t ,  i n the  f o l l o w i n g e x c e l l e n t example o f r h e t o r i c : R h e t o r i c c r e a t e s a v e r b a l e l i t e c a p a b l e of m a n i p u l a t i n g t h e masses, p u t t i n g t h e masses a t t h e mercy of such e t h i c s a s t h a t e l i t e may deem a p p r o p r i a t e f o r i t s purposes ... " R h e t o r i c " appears i n t h e modern p u b l i c p r e s s a l m o s t e x c l u s i v e l y a s a p e r j o r a t i v e term ...  88  Why? One r e a s o n i s t h a t t h e r h e t o r i c i a n i s i n a poor p o s i t i o n t o defend h i m s e l f , a p o s i t i o n a k i n t o t h a t of a w i t c h on t r i a l i n c o l o n i a l Salem. I f he says n o t h i n g , i t can be assumed he has ho d e f e n s e . I f he defends h i m s e l f w i t h the t o o l s of h i s t r a d e , h i s d e t r a c t o r can say, i n essence: "Methinks t h e l a d y d o t h p r o t e s t not o n l y too much but too w e l l ; i f the s o p h i s t i c d e v i l were not i n her she c o u l d not be so eloquent i n d e f e n s e of her honour." A second and f a r more d i s t u r b i n g ; r e a s o n , p l a i n l y p u t , i s t h a t t h e c i r c u m s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e i n f a v o u r of the charge i s overwhelming... ... w h i l e the a c c u s a t i o n had been t h e r e t o o o f t e n i n the p a s t , i t i s not i n h e r e n t i n t h e n a t u r e of r h e t o r i c : a r h e t o r i c w h i c h i n c l u d e s the study of the r a t i o n a l bases f o r b e l i e f i n a s o c i e t y w h i c h n u r t u r e s and r e c i p r o c a l l y depends upon i n d i v i d u a l freedom of c h o i c e i s n e c e s s a r i l y e t h i c a l . Put s u c c i n c t l y , t h e t h e s i s of t h i s a r t i c l e i s t h a t the best a n t i d o t e f o r a s o p h i s t i c r h e t o r i s a s o p h i s t i c a t e d r h e t o r e e , and we had b e s t get .at t h e b u s i n e s s of p r o d u c i n g such an a n t i d o t e . ^ ^emphasis h i s j The  law w i l l i n e v i t a b l y make i t s d e c i s i o n s on t h e b a s i s of v a l u e s ,  and thus w i l l i n e v i t a b l y r e l y on p e r s u a s i o n and r h e t o r i c b o t h i n making t h o s e d e c i s i o n s and i n s u b s e q u e n t l y j u s t i f y i n g them. change t h i s .  C l a i m i n g o t h e r w i s e does not  I t s i m p l y c o n c e a l s the r e a l p r o c e s s , emphasizes t h e wrong  v a l u e s , and d i v e r t s m e a n i n g f u l c r i t i c i s m .  The b e s t a n t i d o t e f o r t h e misuse of  r h e t o r i c by l e g a l d e c i s i o n makers i s t h e development of r h e t o r i c a l l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d judges, lawyers, p r o f e s s o r s , students —  and most i m p o r t a n t , the p u b l i c .  What, t h e n a r e the g e n e r a l ways i n w h i c h a r h e t o r i c a l would a l t e r our v i e w of the law? a u t h o r i t y of our j u d g e s .  The f i r s t r e a l i z a t i o n would c o n c e r n  I t would f l o w not from h i s p o s i t i o n of  power, nor from h i s l o g i c a l a b i l i t y His of  sophistication the  political  ( b o t h of w h i c h would presumably be p r e s e n t ) .  a u t h o r i t y would be based upon h i s s k i l l as a c o n n o i s s e u r and b o t h l e g a l argument and m o r a l judgement.  craftsman  He would need t o be a c o n n o i s s e u r  i n order t o a p p r e c i a t e and choose between opposing arguments, and among appare n t l y r e l e v a n t cases and s t a t u t e s .  He would need t o be a c r a f t s m a n i n o r d e r t o  w r i t e reasons f o r h i s d e c i s i o n s which persuade us t h a t i t was j u s t course to take.  the b e s t , the  L i k e a c o n n o i s s e u r , h i s a u t h o r i t y w i l l stem b o t h  from  89  h i s experience, and from h i s r e a s o n s .  He must be a b l e t o a p p e a l t o v a l u e s  h e l d by h i s a u d i e n c e .  L i k e a c r a f t s m a n , h i s t a s k w i l l be t o perform h i s  task i n an e m o t i o n a l l y  or a e s t h e t i c a l l y p l e a s i n g way.  sibility  i s to q u a l i t y , which, i n law, we c a l l  H i s c r e a t i v e respon-  justice.  The l e g a l p r i n c i p l e s which he a p p l i e s and a p p e a l s t o as j u s t i f i c a t i o n a r e not o b j e c t i v e l y e x i s t i n g r u l e s , but a r e v a l u e p r e f e r e n c e s . he a r r a n g e s these,  The way  that  depends on h i s p e r s o n a l i t y , h i s b e l i e f s , and the a u d i e n c e  to whom he i s r e s p o n s i b l e .  The b e l i e f  t h a t the law i s o b j e c t i v e and r u l e  governed has l e d to the myth of l e g a l r e a s o n i n g .  T h i s amounts t o n o t h i n g  more than the b e l i e f w i d e l y h e l d by the p u b l i c as w e l l as t h e p r o f e s s i o n , only a h i g h l y t r a i n e d , e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y i n t e l l i g e n t  that  e l i t e i s c a p a b l e of d e t e r -  mining whether or not a l e g a l d e c i s i o n i s j u s t . The i n e v i t a b l e r e s u l t s of t h i s b e l i e f  i s that j u d i c i a l reasons, the  j u s t i f i c a t i o n s of d e c i s i o n s , a r e d i r e c t e d almost s o l e l y t o t h i s e l i t e T h i s audience i s the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n , the exact w i t h the l e g a l i s t i c of v a l u e s ,  ideology.  group which has been i n c u l c a t e d  F i r s t we c r e a t e an audience w i t h a s p e c i a l set  then we j u s t i f y our d e c i s i o n s t o o n l y t h a t a u d i e n c e .  S t . Thomas p o i n t e d  But, as  out, t h e law i s the b u s i n e s s of the whole p e o p l e .  e x i s t s f o r the b e n e f i t of a l l ,  audience.  hence i t should,  a s p i r e and respond t o the v a l u e s  i n order  of the whole p e o p l e .  It  t o be seen as j u s t ,  I t must c o n t a i n a good  measure of common sense. The members of the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n must be people of s u p e r i o r logos.  They must a c q u i r e t h e a b i l i t y  v a l u a b l e way.  t o s t r u c t u r e the . l e g a l cosmos i n a  They must be a c c o u n t a b l e t o the whole community,  d e c i s i o n s a f f e c t the whole community. i n t u r n s t r u c t u r e the m o r a l p e r s p e c t i v e pathway t o a l l of these s k i l l s .  for their  They must be a b l e t o r e f e r t o , and of t h e i r c u l t u r e .  But, as I p o i n t e d  Rhetoric  i s the  o u t , l e a r n i n g r h e t o r i c must  90  be l i k e l e a r n i n g t o r i d e .a b i c y c l e .  Memorization  o f r u l e s and c a t e g o r i e s and  t h e i r names w i l l not a s s i s t anyone who has n o t l e a r n e d t o persuade r e a l people.  L e g a l e d u c a t i o n should g i v e up i t s f o o l i s h p r e o c c u p a t i o n w i t h r u l e s  and l e g a l r e a s o n i n g , and devote i t s e l f t o argument, and p e r s u a s i o n .  Judge-  ments should be examined f o r t h e i r j u s t i c e , n o t t h e i r s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e . Students  s h o u l d persuade and be persuaded and then r e f l e c t on how these  t h i n g s happened.  Every moment should be devoted t o advocacy, r a t h e r than  j u s t a few hours a t moot c o u r t t i m e . Remember, I am not s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h e r e i s a " r h e t o r i c a l method" t h a t a j u d g e can a p p l y t o ensure t h a t h i s d e c i s i o n i s t h e best one.  I am  s u g g e s t i n g t h a t a j u d g e has t h e d u t y t o h o n e s t l y seek what appears t o be t h e b e s t d e c i s i o n a s measured by t h e v a l u e s t h a t he deems i m p o r t a n t , and t h e n t o openly s t a t e what these v a l u e s a r e and how t h e y j u s t i f y h i s d e c i s i o n . how i t appears, exercise.  Despite  t h i s g i v e s j u d g e s no more " d i s c r e t i o n " t h a n t h e y a l r e a d y  What i t does do i s i n s i s t t h a t t h e y be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r  d i s c r e t i o n , w h i c h they never w i l l be so l o n g a s t h e y deny t h a t i t e x i s t s . To say t h a t they must be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r d i s c r e t i o n m e r e l y means t h a t they must persuade us t h a t t h e y e x e r c i s e d i t p r o p e r l y . Law i s r a t i o n a l because i t i n v o l v e s t h e use of language t o seek t h e best s o l u t i o n , and then t o j u s t i f y t h i s c h o i c e . the law's attempted  e m u l a t i o n of s c i e n c e .  A g r e a t i r o n y r e s u l t e d from  By p r e t e n d i n g t h a t j u d g e s d i s c o v e r e d  r a t h e r than c r e a t e d t h e law, by s t a t i n g t h a t i t was a p p l y i n g t h e r i g h t answer r a t h e r than p u r s u i n g t h e b e s t c o u r s e of a c t i o n , i t reduced  i t s a b i l i t y to  j u s t i f y i t s d e c i s i o n s , i t r e f u s e d t o pay much a t t e n t i o n t o n o n - o b j e c t i v e v a l u e s , and c o n s e q u e n t l y became lejss r a t h e r t h a n more r a t i o n a l . The  t r a g e d y i s t h a t t h e l a w c o u l d and should p r o v i d e us w i t h a f a r  b e t t e r model of r a t i o n a l i t y than s c i e n c e , b e f o r e w h i c h t h e l a w has so e a g e r l y  91  prostrated i t s e l f .  For whereas s c i e n c e , or a r t or even m o r a l s a r e r a r e l y  compelled t o make d e c i s i o n s , the law must always d e c i d e .  A judge i s never  f r e e t o d e c l i n e making a d e c i s i o n on the b a s i s t h a t b o t h s i d e s o f f e r good reasons,  Nor  can he d e c i d e randomly.  g i v e reasons t o j u s t i f y h i s c h o i c e . of j u s t i c e " .  h i s t o r y and  l u t i o n of man Law  he must, i d e a l l y ,  F a i l u r e t o do t h i s c o n s t i t u t e s a " d e n i a l  What b e t t e r ground f o r r a t i o n a l p e r s u a s i o n  The  choice.  He must choose, and  to f l u o r i s h !  e v o l u t i o n of t h e law can t h u s be seen as the evo-  s t r i v i n g t o be r a t i o n a l i n t h e f a c e of u n c e r t a i n t y and should assume t h i s m a n t l e , and  r a t i o n a l i t y , of s e e k i n g  necessary  s t r i v e t o become a paradigm of  the b e s t c o u r s e of a c t i o n .  There are t h o s e who  w i l l respond w i t h h o r r o r t o my  r h e t o r i c a l l y s k i l l e d j u d g e produces j u s t i c e .  idea that a  I t i s c e r t a i n l y p o s s i b l e to  imagine a j u d g e w r i t i n g an e l o q u e n t d e f e n s e of an u n j u s t d e c i s i o n . would we not  say of t h i s judge t h a t he was  us t h a t h i s d e c i s i o n was  not persuasive.  The  for  And  superb.  persuade And,  if  d e c i s i o n i s not a good  d e c i s i o n , because i t i n f r i n g e s t h i s v a l u e or t h a t v a l u e . s i v e but e v i l .  He d i d not  j u s t , even though h i s eloquence was  he persuaded o t h e r s , w e l l , t h e y a r e m i s t a k e n .  But  I can persuade you t h a t t h i s i s so.  H i t l e r was He had no  persuarespect  human l i f e . The  of any  law i s one  culture.  We  of the most i m p o r t a n t m o r a l and  should  cultural artifacts  realize that, l i k e paintings, l i t e r a t u r e , a r c h i -  t e c t u r e , m u s i c , law i s a d e s c r i p t i o n of o u r s e l v e s and an e u l o g y t o the  values  that i t e x p r e s s e s .  Eulo-  T h i n g s a l w a y s b e g i n t o resemble t h e i r d e s c r i p t i o n .  g i z e d v a l u e s become the r e a l v a l u e s .  I f we want t o be a good, and  we must a l l o w the law t o p r o f e s s e d l y a s p i r e t o goodness and  j u s t people,  justice.  92  NOTES TO CHAPTER ONE  1.  David Hume, An E n q u i r y Concerning Human Understanding i n t h e E n g l i s h P h i l o s o p h e r s from Bacon t o M i l l , ed. by Edwin A. B u r t t , (New York, The Modern L i b r a r y , 1939), p.689..  2.  The many f o l l o w e r s of S i r K a r l Popper w i l l c l a i m t h a t I have ignored h i s t h e o r y of f a l s i f i c a t i o n , which s t a t e s t h a t t h e o r i e s a r e not confirmed, but r a t h e r f a l s i f i e d . Experiments a r e d e s i g n e d , i n t h i s view, not t o c o n f i r m a t h e o r y , but r a t h e r t o f a l s i f y i t . As Feyerabend ( i n f r a ) and o t h e r s have p o i n t e d o u t , Popper's t h e o r y does not save e m p i r i c i s m . I t i s , f u r t h e r m o r e , s u b j e c t t o a l l of the c r i t i c i s m s l e v e l l e d a t more t r a d i t i o n a l forms of p o s i t i v i s m . For these reasons, I have not g i v e n i t t h e a t t e n t i o n t h a t some might t h i n k that i t d e s e r v e s .  3.  Of the many w r i t e r s who have i n f l u e n c e d my i d e a s , two, P a u l K. Feyerabend and M i c h a e l P o l a n y i , a r e r e f e r r e d t o s p e c i f i c a l l y below. Another book which has had an immeasureable impact upon a l l of my t h i n k i n g i s Zen and t h e A r t of M o t o r c y c l e Maintenance by Robert P i r s i g , (New York, Bantam Books, 1974). As should be obvious t o anyone who has read t h a t f i n e work, P i r s i g ' s i n f l u e n c e i s present throughout t h i s t h e s i s .  4.  M i c h a e l P o l a n y i , P e r s o n a l Knowledge: Towards a P o s t - C r i t i c a l (New York and Evanston, Harper and Row, 1958), p.3.  5.  P a u l K. Feyerabend, A g a i n s t Method: O u t l i n e of an A n a r c h i s t i c Theory of Knowledge, (London, N.L.B., 1975), p.23.  6.  A r t h u r K o e s t l e r , The Sleepwalkers: A H i s t o r y of Man's Changing V i s i o n of t h e U n i v e r s e , (London, Penguin Books, 1959), p.444.  7.  P a u l K. Feyerabend, op. c i t . , p.81.  8.  ibid,  9.  See, f o r example, Thomas Kuhn, The S t r u c t u r e of S c i e n t i f i c (Chicago, 1962).  Philosophy,  p.143. Revolutions,  10.  My f a v o u r i t e i s A r t h u r K o e s t l e r i n , f o r example, The Ghost i n t h e Machine, (London, P i c a d o r Books, 1967).  11.  J u d i t h Shklar, Legalism,  12.  ibid,  13.  Paul K. Feyerabend, cp. c i t .  14.  Steve Wexler, " D i s c r e t i o n : U of T Law J o u r n a l , 120.  15.  S h k l a r , op. c i t . , p.38.  (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard  U n i v e r s i t y Press,  1964).  p.4-5.  The Unacknowledged Side of Law", ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 25  93  16.  W e x l e r , op. c i t . , p.148.  17.  i b i d , p.160.  18.  P a u l K. Feyerabend, op, c i t . , p.153.  NOTES TO CHAPTER TWO 1.  J . C. Smith, "The T h e o r e t i c a l C o n s t r u c t s of Western C o n t r a c t u a l Law", Northrop and L i v i n g s t o n , ( e d i t o r s ) , C r o s s - C u l t u r a l U n d e r s t a n d i n g : Epistemology i n Anthropology, (1964), pp.261^262.  2.  Through t h e course of t h i s paper, I o f t e n i n c l u d e t h e Greek word f o r the concept under d i s c u s s i o n . I do not mean t o suggest by t h i s t h a t I am v e r s e d i n the Greek language. Rather, I found i t t o be a conven i e n t method f o r keeping t r a c k of i d e a s t h a t t h e Greek mind was i n t i mately f a m i l i a r w i t h , but t h a t E n g l i s h c a n o n l y i m p e r f e c t l y c a p t u r e by u s i n g a s e r i e s or s e t of more or l e s s separate concepts. I have a l s o , f o r the most p a r t , used E n g l i s h l e t t e r s r a t h e r than Greek l e t t e r s . Where I have used Greek, i t i s because t h e book t h a t gave me t h e word used o n l y Greek, and I have been i n c a p a b l e of t r a n s l i t e r a t i n g .  3.  Arthur  4.  I mean to i n c l u d e , perhaps i n a c c u r a t e l y , the B a c c h i c of the word "Orphism".  5.  Bertrand R u s s e l l , A H i s t o r y of Western P h i l o s o p h y , Schuster, 1945), p.33.  6.  Arthur  7.  Bertrand  8.  F r i t j o f Capra, The Tao o f P h y s i c s ,  9.  E v e r e t t Lee Hunt, " P l a t o and A r i s t o t l e on R h e t o r i c and R h e t o r i c i a n s " , i n Howes, ( e d i t o r ) , H i s t o r i c a l S t u d i e s of R h e t o r i c and R h e t o r i c i a n s , ( I t h a c a , New York, C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 6 1 ) , p.19.  K o e s t l e r , The Sleepwalkers, p.25. r e l i g i o n s i n my use  (New York, Simon and  K o e s t l e r , The Sleepwalkers, p.38. R u s s e l l , op. c i t . , p.44. (U.S.A., Bantam Books, 1 9 7 5 ) , pp.103-104.  10.  ibid,  pp.21-22.  11.  quoted by Hunt, i b i d , p.27.  12.  I a c q u i r e d most of t h e i n f o r m a t i o n on P r o t a g o r a s from t h e e x c e l l e n t book, The S o p h i s t s , by M a r i o U n t e r s t e i n e r , t r a n s l a t e d from t h e I t a l i a n by K a t h l e e n Freeman, (New York, P h i l o s o p h i c a l L i b r a r y , 1954).  13.  Quoted by Samuel I J s s e l i n g , R h e t o r i c and P h i l o s o p h y i n C o n f l i c t : An H i s t o r i c a l Survey, t r a n s l a t e d by P a u l Dunphy, (The Hague, M a r t i n u s N i j h o f f , 1976), pp.18-19.  94  14.  Untersteiner,  15.  ibid,  p.27.  16.  ibid,  p.31.  17.  For example,  18.  Untersteiner,  op. c i t . , p.23.  see R u s s e l l , op. c i t . , p.77. op. c i t . , p.42.  —  1  \  19.  P l a t o , T h e a e t e t u s 166 D f f . , i n The Older S o p h i s t s , e d i t e d by Rosemond Kent Sprague, (Columbia, South C a r o l i n a , U n i v e r s i t y of South C a r o l i n a , 1972), p.14.  20.  Untersteiner,  21.  R e l a t e d by P l a t o i n The P r o t a g o r a s , t r a n s l a t e d by W.K.C. G u t h r i e , Penguin Books, 1956), 320 D f f . pp.52-53.  22.  Hunt, op. c i t . , p.33.  23.  P l a t o , G o r g i a s , t r a n s l a t e d by Walter Hamilton, (London, Penguin Books, 1960).  24.  See U n t e r s t e i n e r ,  25.  P l a t o , Phaedrus, t r a n s l a t e d by W. C. Helmbold and W. G. R a b i n o w i t z , ( I n d i a n a p o l i s',.Bobbs-Merr i l l Company L t d . , 1956).  26.  P l a t o , Phaedrus, op. c i t . , 262,  27.  Hunt,  28.  A r i s t o t l e , T r e a t i s e on R h e t o r i c , t r a n s l a t e d by Theodore B u c k l e y , (London, George B e l l and Sons, 1890), p . l .  29.  Oscar L. Brownstein, " A r i s t o t l e and the R h e t o r i c a l P r o c e s s " , i n Walter R. F i s h e r , ( e d i t o r ) , R h e t o r i c : A T r a d i t i o n i n T r a n s i t i o n , (Ann A r b o r , M i c h i g a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1974).  30.  Michael Polanyi,  31.  J . C. Smith and David N. Weisstub, "The E v o l u t i o n of Western Consciousness", unpublished.  32.  See K o e s t l e r , The S l e e p w a l k e r s , op. c i t .  op. c i t . , p.55. (London,  op. c i t . , Chapters IV-IX.  p.50.  op. c i t . , p.45,  op. c i t . , pp.49-50. Legal  NOTES TO CHAPTER THREE 1.  F r i e d r i c h N i e t z c h e , Thus Spoke Z a r a t h u s t r a , (London, Penguin Books, 1961), p.14.  t r a n s l a t e d by R. J . H o l l i n g d a l e ,  95  2.  Samuel I J s s e l i n g , op. c i t . , p.104.  3.  Chaim Perelman and L. O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a , The New R h e t o r i c : A T r e a t i s e on Argumentation, t r a n s l a t e d by John W i l k i n s o n and P u r c e l l Weaver, (Notre Dame and London, U n i v e r s i t y of Notre Dame P r e s s , 1969), p.4.  4.  M a r i e N i c h o l s , "The Humane T r a d i t i o n i n R h e t o r i c " i n R h e t o r i c : A T r a d i t i o n i n T r a n s i t i o n , e d i t e d by Walter R. F i s h e r , (Ann A r b o r , M i c h i g a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1974), p.180.  5.  Donald C. Bryant, R h e t o r i c : pp.199, 202, 211.  6.  Gary C r o n k h i t e , " R h e t o r i c , A Study i n P s y c h o e p i s t o m o l o g i c a l i n F i s h e r , op. c i t . , p.262.  7.  Wayne C. Booth, " R h e t o r i c Today: A P o l e m i c a l E x c u r s i o n " , i n The Prospect of R h e t o r i c : Report of t h e N a t i o n a l Development P r o j e c t , (Englewood C l i f f s , New J e r s e y , P r e n t i c e - H a l l Inc., 1971), p.95.  8.  K o e s t l e r , The Ghost i n t h e Machine, op. c i t .  9.  Bryant, op. c i t . , p,214.  I t s Scope and F u n c t i o n ,  i n F i s h e r , op. c i t . ,  Communication",  10.  See Note 4, Chapter One.  11.  P o l a n y i , op. c i t . , p. 133.  12.  T h i s i s a key i d e a i n P o l a n y i ' s book.  13.  John Scharr,"Some R e f l e c t i o n s on A u t h o r i t y " , New American Review, V o l . 8, (1970), pp.44-80.  14.  P o l a n y i , op. c i t . , p.221.  15.  Perelman and O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a ,  16.  See S i s s e l a Bok, L y i n g : Moral Choice i n P u b l i c - P r i v a t e L i f e , and T o r o n t o , Random House, 1978).  17.  K a r l Wallace, "The Fundamentals of R h e t o r i c " , p.15.  18.  R i c h a r d M. Weaver, Language i s S e r m o n i c : R i c h a r d M. Weaver on t h e Nature of R h e t o r i c , e d i t e d by R i c h a r d L . Hohannsen, Rennard S t r i c k l a n d and Ralph T. Eubanks, (Baton Rouge, L o u i s i a n a , S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1970), pp.207-208.  19.  J . C. Smith, L e g a l O b l i g a t i o n , P r e s s , 1976), p.89.  20.  Wexler, op. c i t . , p.181,  21.  N i c h o l s , op. c i t . , p.189.  22.  Cronkhite,  op. c i t . , p.3.  (Toronto  op. c i t . , pp.261-262,  (New York  i n B l a c k & B i t z e r , op. c i t . ,  and B u f f a l o , U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto  96  BIBLIOGRAPHY  A l l e n , R e g i n a l d E. ( e d . ) , Greek P h i l o s o p h y : The F r e e P r e s s , 1966.  T h a l e s t o A r i s t o t l e , New York,  A r i s t o t l e , T r e a t i s e on R h e t o r i c , t r a n s l a t e d by Theodore Buckley, London, George B e l l and Sons, 1890. B a i r d , A. C r a i g , R h e t o r i c : Co., 1965.  3rd ed.,  A P h i l o s o p h i c a l I n q u i r y , New York, Ronald  Press  B i t z e r , L l o y d F., and Black, Edwin ( e d . ) , The Prospect of R h e t o r i c : Report of the N a t i o n a l Developmental P r o j e c t , Englewood C l i f f s , New J e r s e y , P r e n t i c e - H a l l Inc., 1971. Bok,  S i s s e l a , Lying: Moral Choice Toronto, Random House, 1978.  i n P u b l i c - P r i v a t e L i f e , New York and  Capra, F r i t j o f , The Tao of P h y s i c s : An E x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e P a r a l l e l s between Modern P h y s i c s and E a s t e r n M y s t i c i s m , New York, Toronto and London, Bantam Books, 1975. Chaneles, S o l and Snyder, Jerome, That P e s t i l e n t Cosmetic, R h e t o r i c , New York, Grossman P u b l i s h e r s , 1972. C h a t t e r j e e , S a t i s c h a n d r a , and Dhirendramohen, D a t t a , An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o I n d i a n P h i l o s o p h y , 7th ed., C a l c u t t a , U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l c u t t a , 1968. Cohn, George, E x i s t e n t i a l i s m and L e g a l S c i e n c e , t r a n s l a t e d by George H. New York, Oceana P u b l i c a t i o n s L t d . , 1967.  Kendal,  Dixon, P e t e r , R h e t o r i c , London, Methuen and Co. L t d . , 1971. Feyerabend, P a u l K., A g a i n s t Method: O u t l i n e of an A n a r c h i s t i c Theory of Knowledge, London, N.L.B., 1975. F i s h e r , Walter R. ( e d . ) , R h e t o r i c : A T r a d i t i o n i n T r a n s i t i o n , Ann A r b o r , Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1974. Grandy, R i c h a r d E., T h e o r i e s and O b s e r v a t i o n H a l l Inc., 1973.  i n S c i e n c e , New J e r s e y , P r e n t i c e -  H a r r i n g t o n , E l b e r t W. , R h e t o r i c and t h e S c i e n t i f i c Method of I n q u i r y : of I n v e n t i o n , Boulder, U n i v e r s i t y of Colorado P r e s s , Dec. 1948.  A Study  Horowitz, Joseph, Lav? and L o g i c : A C r i t i c a l Account of L e g a l Argument, New York, Vienna, S p r i n g e r - V e r l a g , 1972. Howes, Raymond F. ( e d . ) , H i s t o r i c a l S t u d i e s of R h e t o r i c and R h e t o r i c i a n s , I t h a c a , New York, C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1961.  97  Hughes, Graham (ed.)> Law, Reason and J u s t i c e : Essays i n L e g a l P h i l o s o p h y , New York, New York U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1969. Hume, David, An E n q u i r y Concerning Human U n d e r s t a n d i n g , i n The E n g l i s h P h i l o s o p h e r s from Bacon t o M i l l , e d i t e d by Edwin A. B u r t t , New York, The Modern L i b r a r y , 1939. I J s s e l i n g , Samuel I . , R h e t o r i c and P h i l o s o p h y : Hague, M a r t i n u s N i j h o f f , 1976. K o e s t l e r , A r t h u r , The Ghost  An H i s t o r i c a l Survey, The  i n the Machine, London, Pan Books, 1967.  K o e s t l e r , A r t h u r , The S l e e p w a l k e r s : A H i s t o r y of Man's Changing the U n i v e r s e , London, Penguin Books, 1959.  V i s i o n of  Kuhn, Thomas, The S t r u c t u r e of S c i e n t i f i c R e v o l u t i o n s , Chicago, 1962. L i n d s a y , P e t e r H. and Norman, Donald A., Human I n f o r m a t i o n P r o c e s s i n g , An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o Psychology, New York and London, Academic P r e s s , 1972. N i e t z c h e , F r i e d r i c h , Thus Spoke Z a r a t h u s t r a , t r a n s l a t e d by R. J . H o l l i n g d a l e , London, Penguin Books, 1961. Northrop, F.S.C., The L o g i c of t h e S c i e n c e s and t h e Humanities, C l e v e l a n d and New York, World P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1947. Ong,  Walter J . , R h e t o r i c , Romance, and Technology: Studies i n the Interaction of E x p r e s s i o n and C u l t u r e , I t h a c a and London, C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s ,  1971. Perelman, Chaim, The Idea of J u s t i c e and t h e Problem of Argument, t r a n s l a t e d by John P e t r i e , London and Henley, Routledge and Kegan P a u l , 1963. Perelman, Chaim and O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a , L., The New R h e t o r i c : A T r e a t i s e on Argumentation, t r a n s l a t e d by John W i l k i n s o n and P u r c e l l Weaver, Notre Dame, London, U n i v e r s i t y of Notre Dame P r e s s , 1969 ( o r i g i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d as La N o u v e l l e R h e t o r i q u e : T r a i t e de 1'Argumentation, P r e s s e s U n i v e r s i t a i r e s de France, 1958). P e r r y , Thomas D., M o r a l Reasoning and T r u t h : An Essay i n P h i l o s o p h y and J u r i s p r u d e n c e , Oxford, C l a r e n d o n P r e s s , 1976. P i r s i g , Robert M., Zen and t h e A r t of M o t o r c y c l e Maintenance: An I n q u i r y i n t o V a l u e s , T o r o n t o , New York, London, Bantam Books, 1974. P l a t o , G o r g i a s , t r a n s l a t e d by Walter Hamilton, London, Penguin Books, 1960. P l a t o , Phaedrus, t r a n s l a t e d by W. C. Helmbold, and W. G. R a b i n o w i t z , I n d i a n o p o l i s , New York, B o b b s - M e r r e l l Co. I n c . , 1956. P l a t o , P r o t a g o r a s and Meno, t r a n s l a t e d by W.K.C. G u t h r i e , London, Books, 1960.  Penguin  98  P o l a n y i , M i c h a e l , P e r s o n a l Knowledge: Towards a P o s t C r i t i c a l New York, and E v a n s t o n , Harper and Row, 1958. R i c h a r d s , I . A., The P h i l o s o p h y of R h e t o r i c , New s i t y P r e s s , 1936.  Philisophy,  Y o r k , London, Oxford U n i v e r -  R u s s e l l , B e r t r a n d , A H i s t o r y of Western P h i l o s o p h y , New Y o r k , Simon and S c h u s t e r , 1945. S c h a r r , John, "Some R e f l e c t i o n s on A u t h o r i t y " , New American Review, V o l . 8, 1970. S h k l a r , J u d i t h , L e g a l i s m , Cambridge, Mass., Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1964. Smith, J . C , L e g a l O b l i g a t i o n , Toronto and B u f f a l o , U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1976. Smith, J . C , "The T h e o r e t i c a l C o n s t r u c t s of Western C o n t r a c t u a l Law", e d i t e d by N o r t h r o p and L i v i n g s t o n , C r o s s - C u l t u r a l U n d e r s t a n d i n g : Epistemology i n A n t h r o p o l o g y , 1964. Smith, Robert W., The A r t of R h e t o r i c i n A l e x a n d r i a . I t s Theory and i n the A n c i e n t World, The Hague, M a r t i n u s N i j h o f f , 1974. Sprague, Rosamond K e t n , The O l d e r S o p h i s t s , Columbia, S. C , South C a r o l i n a P r e s s , 1972.  Practice  U n i v e r s i t y of  Stone, J u l i u s , L e g a l System and Lawyer's R e a s o n i n g s , London, Stevens and Sons L t d . , 1964. T o u l m i n , Stephen E., An E x a m i n a t i o n of t h e P l a c e of Reason i n E t h i c s , Cambridge, 1950. U n t e r s t e i n e r , M a r i o , The S o p h i s t s , t r a n s l a t e d by K a t h l e e n Freeman, New P h i l o s o p h i c a l L i b r a r y , 1954. Weaver, R i c h a r d , The E t h i c s of R h e t o r i c , C h i c a g o , Henry Regneny Co.,  York,  1965.  Weaver, R i c h a r d , Language i s Sermonic: R i c h a r d M. Weaver on the N a t u r e of R h e t o r i c , e d i t e d by R i c h a r d L. Hohannsen, Rennard S t r i c k l a n d and R a l p h T. Eubanks, Baton Rouge, L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1970. Wexler, Steve, " D i s c r e t i o n : The Unacknowledged S i d e of Law", U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Law J o u r n a l 120.  (1975), 25  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0077639/manifest

Comment

Related Items