18. Man's Orientation Toward Truth: Easy and Difficult

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

Obvious Presuppositions About Truth #

• Aristotle does not ask whether truth exists or whether man can know truth—these are obvious (per se notum)
• Modern philosophers mistakenly begin by questioning truth’s existence; Aristotle assumes this and moves directly to the real question
• The existence of truth is demonstrated performatively: denying truth requires making a statement, which presupposes truth exists
• Similarly, man’s capacity to know some truth is obvious and undeniable

The Central Question: Easy or Difficult? #

• Rather than asking “Can man know truth?” Aristotle asks “Is knowing truth easy or difficult?”
• The answer is paradoxical: in some ways easy, in other ways difficult
• Aristotle addresses the difficulty first, then shows the easiness

Truth is Easy for Man (Three Reasons) #

1. Universal Participation: Everyone grasps some truth, however small. No person can live without encountering truth about the world.
2. Collective Accumulation: Through the efforts of many over time, a large body of truth becomes easy to access. Individual contributions combine to build arts and sciences.
3. The Universal Grasp: There exists some part of truth everyone sees (e.g., “the whole is greater than the part”), which serves as the foundation for all further knowledge.

Truth is Difficult for Man (Two Sources) #

1. Defect in Us: Our minds are weak relative to the most illuminating things. As the bat’s eyes are blinded by daylight, our understanding is overwhelmed by what is by nature clearest (first causes, divine things). This is the primary source of difficulty.
2. Defect in the Thing: Some truths are difficult because of their nature—their obscurity or potentiality. This applies more to natural philosophy than to wisdom.

The Wise Man’s Role in Method #

• The consideration of truth belongs most properly to the wise man
• Before asking “What is the road to wisdom?” one must ask the more general question: “How should one determine the road in any science?”
• This general methodological question applies to geometry, natural philosophy, ethics, politics, and wisdom
• The wise man, being architectonic and directing all other inquiries, is most appropriate to address this question
• Even though this methodological question is relevant to all sciences, only the wise man properly handles it because he directs all knowers

The Problem of Self-Deception #

• Man can think he knows what he does not know (common mistake, especially due to pride)
• Man can think he does not know what he does know (rare mistake made by thinkers)
• Both mistakes are possible: if someone can mistake a grapefruit for an orange, someone else can mistake an orange for a grapefruit
• Aristotle uses the first, more obvious mistake as a sign that the reverse is possible
• The second mistake occurs when thinkers encounter arguments against obvious truths they cannot answer, leading them to doubt what they genuinely know

The Principle of Non-Contradiction #

• Those who deny that something cannot both be and not be actually affirm the principle through their denial
• They deny it because something contradicts their position—so they deny it because they accept it (performative contradiction)
• The axiom of contradiction cannot be tested by its consequences because testing presupposes the axiom itself
• Even sophisticated arguments (e.g., Hegel’s paradox of becoming) can deceive people into thinking they’ve refuted obvious truths

Key Arguments #

The Bat’s Eye Analogy #

• As the bat’s eyes are to the light of day (too bright to see), so is our understanding to what is by nature most clear (first causes, divine things)
• Things most visible in themselves are least visible to us due to our cognitive weakness
• This shows the difficulty resides in us, not in the things

The Mistake Reversibility Argument #

• If it is possible for someone to mistake A for B, then it is possible for someone to mistake B for A
• This is because such mistakes occur because the two are difficult to distinguish
• Example: If one can mistake a grapefruit for an orange, one can mistake an orange for a grapefruit
• Application: If man can think he knows what he does not know, he can think he does not know what he does know

The Performative Contradiction Argument #

• Those who deny the existence of truth make a statement (which is true or false)
• If the statement “truth does not exist” is true, then truth exists
• If it is false, then truth exists
• Either way, the position refutes itself through its own assertion

The Contradiction Principle Cannot Be Tested #

• To test a hypothesis, one observes whether its consequences are contradicted by reality
• But testing whether “nothing can both be and not be” requires assuming that principle
• Therefore, the principle cannot be tested without already affirming it
• Attempting to test it would be absurd

Important Definitions #

Truth (ἀλήθεια): That which exists and can be known; the correspondence between statement and reality. Statements are true or false. The existence of truth is obvious and undeniable.

Per se notum (self-evident): Propositions so obvious that denying them is absurd or self-refuting. The existence of truth and man’s capacity to know truth are per se notum.

Difficulty in Knowing (as discussed): Either rooted in a defect in us (our cognitive weakness) or in a defect in the thing itself (its obscurity or obscureness). The chief difficulty in knowing truth is in us, not in things.

The Wise Man (ὁ σοφός): One who knows truth itself and directs all other knowers. The wise man is architectonic—most appropriate to determine how the road should be pursued in any science.

Examples & Illustrations #

The Grapefruit and Orange #

• Berquist’s personal anecdote: while cutting fruit at breakfast in Omaha, he had difficulty distinguishing between an orange and a grapefruit
• He started cutting what he thought was an orange, then realized it was a grapefruit
• Illustrates how mistakes can go in either direction—if one person mistakes a grapefruit for an orange, another can mistake an orange for a grapefruit

The Map Analogy #

• Before asking “What road to Boston?” one must know how to read a map
• Similarly, before asking “What road to wisdom?” one must understand how to determine the proper road in any science
• The general methodological question applies to all sciences but belongs most properly to the wise man

The Hegel Paradox of Becoming #

• Suppose something that is not a sphere becomes a sphere
• Is there a last instant in which it is not a sphere and a first instant in which it is?
• If they are the same instant, then at that instant it both is and is not a sphere
• If they are different instants, an infinite regress of intermediate instants arises
• This seems to prove that something can both be and not be (contradiction)
• Hegel uses this to argue that contradiction is fundamental to reality

The Eucharistic Problem in Medieval Theology #

• The same paradox arose in theological context: there is a time when bread and wine are present, and a later time when the body and blood of Christ are present
• If the last instant of bread/wine is the first instant of body/blood, heresy follows
• Thomas Aquinas solved this by returning to Aristotle’s Book VI of the Physics
• Aristotle’s solution: there is no last instant in which something is not a sphere, but there is a first instant in which it is
• Example: when dying, there is a last moment of life but no “last instant of being alive”—only a first instant of being dead

Notable Quotes #

“It would be laughable to try to prove what you know, because what is there besides what you know but what you don’t know?” — Aristotle (cited by Berquist)

“The existence of truth is obvious. It’s per se notum.” — Thomas Aquinas (cited by Berquist)

“People who deny the principle of contradiction deny it because they accept it.” — Berquist’s paraphrase of Aristotle

“As the eyes of bats are towards the light of day, so is the understanding of our soul towards what are by nature the clearest of all.” — Aristotle (cited by Berquist)

Questions Addressed #

Does truth exist? #

Answer: Yes, obviously and undeniably. Denying truth requires making a statement, which presupposes truth exists. Aristotle does not waste time proving this because it is per se notum.

Can man know truth? #

Answer: Yes, obviously. Aristotle assumes this and never questions it. The real question is whether knowing truth is easy or difficult.

Is knowing truth easy or difficult? #

Answer: Both. In some ways it is easy (everyone grasps some truth; through collective effort much truth becomes accessible; universal principles are within reach). In other ways it is very difficult (our minds are weak; the most illuminating things—first causes and divine things—are hardest for us to know).

What causes the chief difficulty in knowing truth? #

Answer: Primarily a defect in us—our cognitive weakness before what is by nature most clear. Secondarily, a defect in the thing itself (for natural philosophy more than wisdom).

Why does Aristotle address this question in Book II of the Metaphysics? #

Answer: The question “How is man oriented toward truth?” is more fundamental than the question “What is the road to wisdom?” because it applies universally to all sciences. It is appropriate for the wise man to address, as he directs all other knowers and sciences.

Can man think he does not know what he actually does know? #

Answer: Yes, though it is rare. This is shown by the fact that man can (more commonly) think he knows what he does not know. If mistakes can go one direction, they can go the other. This second error occurs when someone encounters arguments against obvious truths that he cannot refute, leading him to doubt what he genuinely knows.

Is the principle of non-contradiction self-evident? #

Answer: Yes. Those who deny it actually affirm it through their denial—they deny it because something contradicts their position. The axiom cannot be tested because testing requires assuming it.

Connections to Broader Aristotelian Inquiry #

• This lecture establishes the proper starting point for wisdom: understanding how man relates to truth generally, before asking how to pursue truth in any particular science
• The discussion of the wise man’s architectonic role previews the treatment of method (Book II, Reading 5) and the nature of wisdom itself
• The analysis of self-deception and the principle of non-contradiction grounds Aristotle’s metaphysical inquiry in Book IV