Introduction to Philosophy & Logic (1999)
Lecture 3: The Order of Sciences and Certainty

Transcript
================================================================================

And so you have to take into account what's found in the earth because of matter and the variations of matter and so on. You don't have to consider it in the ubiquitous way. We talk about the shape of the tire and the size of the tire is like circular, right? But look at the tire out there in the parking lot. The bottom of the tire is five and out, right? Does the geometry have to worry about the bottom of the circle getting five and out? No. Because now you're adding something to the sphere, the circle, and so on, namely matter, right? So arithmetic is more certain than geometry. The geometry adds more to be considered, more to take into account. Actual philosophy is less certain than geometry, if you add matter there, right? And now when you go from what man is by nature to 20th century or 21st century American man, now you're adding what? Yeah. Because man, 21st century American man, is what he is, not just by what he has by nature, but by what? Customs and by choice and so on, right? So you have to consider many more things now, right, than they had to there, right? Talk about the Israelites and the Palestinians, right? Do you consider they're human beings? No, you have to consider all these, you know, things are accustomed to do, and choice of being made, and all this sort of thing, right? So it's very complicated and very uncertain, right? So that's basically the order centered to arithmetic, geometry, natural philosophy, clinical philosophy. It's easier for me to count and be sure the number of people here in this loop today, than they go to Yankee Stadium and be, what, sure to have counted in the way, right? And the more things you have to take into a pound, the less sure you are, right? So that's the principle, right? Now, as you go to what's most universal, you have more or less things to consider. Yeah. As you go from the more universal to the less universal, you keep on adding, don't you? And I go from figure to plane figure, to rectilineal plane figure, to quadrilateral, to square, right? I keep on adding more things to be taken into account. So in a way, if he talks about what is said of all, what's most universal, he has to take into account the least. And that is going to be more sure than anybody else. Kind of a subtle thing, right? I say there are many ways to argue these three things. There are sounds reaching from all of the first three things to his knowledge of being most universal. It's about what is most universal, what is said of all. Now, from the last three, he's going to argue that it's about the first causes. And the science which considers causes, the second paragraph in page four, is more fit for teaching. For those teach who give the causes of each thing. So the man who can give what? Not only the cause, but the cause of the cause, he can what? Why do these guys come and get each other down there? Because they hate each other, right? Now, why do they hate each other, right? The man who can teach the cause of the cause can teach more, right? It's all the way to get to the what? First, he's mostly able to teach. I was going to argue in the next paragraph that if wisdom is the knowledge that's most desirable for its own sake, who's desirable as knowledge, right? It's because it most of all makes us know, right? What most of all makes us know? It's the cause that illuminates the effect, right? And explains the effect, right? And the man who explains the cause of something, he seems to illuminate that, right? So he says, understanding and knowledge for the sake of themselves especially belong to the knowledge of the most knowable to the man who desires to know for itself, for most desire, for his most knowable and such as that are most knowable and most knowable are the first things of the cause, not to us, he doesn't mean, right? The care that things are the most like illuminating of all, right? For other things are known through these and from them but not these through what comes under him. Most of all, it's the cause, it's the effect, right? If you know the effect, but not the cause, you're still kind of in the dark about this, right? So if he's seeking what's most knowable and what's most illuminating, he's seeking the first causes. Now, when you study the four kinds of causes, you realize that the chief cause is the end of purpose. And he says, that is the chief science, and more ruling than the subordinate, which knows that for the sake of which, which is the definition of end, each thing ought to be done. This over is the good of each, and as a whole, I think all things will come, the best in all nature. If you knew the end of purpose of the whole universe, right? You always direct others by knowing the end, right? So the man who knows the end of the whole universe is most of all you're going to direct others. Of course, God is the Alpha and the Omega, right? He became the end of all things. Now, the final conclusion here, this is something I read. From all the four said, the name thought may be wisdom, falls in the same silence. For it's necessary that this look at the first beginnings and causes. For one of the causes is the good, and that for the sake of which. Well, that's the end of the first of the two parts of the reading, right? What he's been showing up to this point is, what is wisdom aiming at, right? And the Greek word, skopos, is the word he used when he talked about aiming at a target, right? So he's aiming at causes, and most of all, at the, what? First causes of the first causes. The science of the first causes, and we've been talking about it. Now, how long can we go to the three reading or what? Okay? Now, as I mentioned, at the end of the frame, there's an epilogue, right? If you recall, the second thing he did, and the first thing he did, right? Now, in the third reading here, now, these readings are taken from Thomas' commentary, right? The third reading here, which is the second part of the premium, what kind of knowledge is wisdom? And Aristotle is going to say four things about the kind of knowledge is wisdom. And one will kind of lead into the next one. He's going to say that it's looking knowledge, right? Not practical knowledge. Sometimes you see the Greek word theoretical, that means looking knowledge. He's going to show that it's the most liberal knowledge there is. And that's going to follow from the Greek word speaking knowledge. He's going to show that it's not a human possession, because man is enslaved in the ways. And finally, he's going to show that it's the most honorable and the best knowledge, because it's the most divine. And one of these, we'll see, it leads into the next one. Now, it is not a making, or generally we would say practical science. He's going to give two signs, his knowledge is not quite practical, but that it's for the sake of life. Understanding, right? And the first sign is going to be that it arose, not because of hunger or thirst or something like that, but it arose from wonder, and therefore simply from the desire to know. So he says, but it is not a making science is clear also from those first philosophized. For men, both now and at first, begin to philosophize, do wonder. This is something that Plato had said before Aristotle. I don't think it says that, right? It's in the Greek text. For men, both now and at first, begin to philosophize, do wonder. In the beginning, which is in order of this, wondering about strange things close to the end. Then little by little, thus going forward, raising questions about the greater things. It's about the change of the moon, you know, the sun of the stars. And finally, about the very horrid universe. So the wonder grew, right? But the man, in doubt and wondering, thinks himself to be what? Inger, right? And we'll come back to what he says about the philomuthos in a second. If men philosophize to escape ignorance, it is clear that they sought knowledge for the sake of understanding and not good use. Now, to give a little sign, what is a philomuthos? A muthos first means a myth, something like our fairy tales, isn't it? A muthos takes on the broader sense of any story, and finally our style uses an athletics for a plot, right? So the lover of fairy tales, right? A lover of stories, right? A lover of plots is in some way a philosopher. There's an affinity between the lomuthos and the philosopher. And the likeness consists in that the myth is put together from what? One, right? So a friend of my brother's who teaches literature says, great literature ends in wonder, and philosophy begins in wonder, right? So the great literature kind of aroused the kind of wonder in the philomuthos, and this wonder is a stepping stone to the wonder of philosophy. Albert the Great, the teacher of Thomas, commonly in his passage, he says that great poetry, great fiction, and that modem admirandi, it teaches us how to what? Wonder, right? So it is not by chance that Homer came before the philosophers. Homer is the greatest of the poets, huh? And the Iliad and the Odyssey and so on. They aroused a wonder which is not quite the wonder of the philosopher. It is a stepping stone to that wonder, right? And it shows young dickens in moderns that they didn't become better philosophers under the influence of Shakespeare, right? I know myself, though, and I would say, and I first think there's some philosophy in there, but there were just a piece of books of Aristotle there, right? And I'm kind of looking at all these books, right? And the book that got my attention was a book called Politics, right? And I was much involved in that high school, right? But then when I became a freshman in college, I was in a special class with my grammar and so on, right? And we were doing interesting things, and the professor says, you're going to read some Shakespeare. You've probably never read in high school. So I read a number of Shakespeare's plays in this course, and this was the occasion for my, to get a complete volume of Shakespeare, right? And I read all of Shakespeare's plays at freshman year in a big sort of sense. But that completed my transition from, what, a man concerned with the fate of his country to, what, a philosopher, right? A wonder that Shakespeare arouses, right? There's only a poet like Homer or Sophocles or Shakespeare that really arouses that wonder. Shakespeare's farewell to the stage of the Tempus, right? Or on there, and he was taken from wonder. Pretty beautiful. Not a wonderful thing, isn't it? So Aristotle's saying there's an affinity of a philomuthas to a philosopher. And sometimes people, you know, kind of philomuthas is kind of a substitute for being a philosopher. There's something like the philosopher, right? Okay? My brother Richard was very much interested in fiction and drama and all these sort of things. He eventually became a philosopher, right? But the philomuthas on the way to being a philosopher. So Monsignor Dian, you know, he agreed when I said there would have been no philosophers without Homer. And, as I say, Albert is very insistent upon that, to teach us how to wonder. And so, I had never known a good philosopher who's not a Philomuthas. I had known a Philomuthas who's not a philosopher, but I had never known a philosopher who's not a Philomuthas. So, this is very, you know, bright in here to bring out that philosophy did begin in one way, right? Therefore, if it had begun in hunger, or thirst, or desire to get warm, then it would have led to something practical, right? Like the art of hunting, or the art of farming. The fact that it began in wonder, that desire is something to know. It's a sign that it's like looking now, right? I'm going to give you a little, another page here. Here's the three main texts that I know of with the Greeks on wonder, right? And, I'll reproduce things here, during this agreement. But, you know, what's renewed to you is the text from Plato. Timothy of Titus, and then a nice frame on the Democritus. The Democritus is framed and saying, I would rather discover one cause than be master of the king of the Persians. So, I have to explain to the students, you know, that that was the greatest king in the world at the time. So, if I was master of the king of the Persians, I'd be the wealthiest man in the world, right? I read that they had a thousand chefs prepare dinner every night. It wasn't good, you know. I'm sure they had a harem, you know. So, all the things have been lost, right? The master of the king of the Persians has success. But, Democritus says, I would rather discover one cause than be master of the Persians. The intense wonder of the philosophy, right? Plato is a very nice Texans in the States, you know. So, I'll give you a copy of it in the class here. Now, the second sign that Aristotle gives. What happened witnesses this. Phenomenal was all necessary things. And those recreation and amusement existed. Then such knowledge as philosophy began to be stopped, right? So, it is clear that we seek this knowledge through no other need. I sometimes witness that with my own family, right? I've come from a family of three boys, and we're all philosophers. My mother was, trust me, you should make you up, right? Now, my father was a businessman, right? My grandfather was a blacksmith. My grandfather came over from Sweden at the age of 15, and he became the blacksmith of Carpish Prairie in Minnesota, right? And you think you're going to be philosophizing this man? No. See? You know, this is very tiring work, right, huh? So, would my father be a philosopher, being the son of the blacksmith? And in fact, Carpish Prairie, at the time my father was a boy, such a, you know, town, he didn't even have a high school. So, my father wanted to go to high school. Well, he went to college, right? He wanted to go to high school, at least, right? So, he went to Alexandria, Minnesota, which is a larger town, right? And he enrolled in the high school, right? But he had a supportive cell to go through the high school, right? So, he worked in a shop that he found, right? But he didn't make enough money to be able to afford a room. So, he asked the owner of the shop if he could sleep in the shop at night. The guy felt sorry for him, so he doesn't work in the shop at night. Now, do you think my father is thinking of philosophizing? See? Okay? So, my father, you know, he was an intelligent man, right? Even if he had more education than those, he would have done, right? But eventually, you know, he got into a managerial position, right? And men with money started to back him up, right? And eventually, he got his own company, right? Okay? But now, there was a little bit of, yeah, a little bit of money, you know? My father always made us work in the summer, you know, sitting around, right? But he always helped us, you know, when he's getting much education, he can, right? He ends up with three sons who are philosophers, right? But you know what Aristotle is talking about, right? I was an old philosopher in my grandfather's generation. Even in my father's generation, all of a sudden, he got to be asleep, right? I see my children, you know, I'm not quite so wealthy as a professor, and they do other things, right? You could be a third generation when I was a philosopher. But that's the side of Aristotle's talking about it. You see my own family, right? And so the average student is trying to get a little interest in philosophy, and I didn't make a limit, right? And that's the truth of that, obviously, right? Aristotle's talking about it. So those are the two signs, but the main one is from London, right? It's this knowledge-looking knowledge, right? Now, the second thing he says about this knowledge is that it's liberal as opposed to surva, right? Now, most people don't understand the origin of the term liberal education and surva education. It goes back to the, not only the Romans, but all over, back to the Greeks, if I didn't play them. And, of course, all those societies had free men and slaves, right? And by an analogy in proportion to the difference between a free man and a slave in that society, that they called some knowledge liberal or free, and others, what, surva or slave. Now, the obvious difference between the free man and the slave is that the slave exists not for his own sake. The slave exists for the sacred master. I'm not saying that's clear or bad, but that's the fact, right? By the master, he exists, the free man, he exists for his own sake, right? So, by analogy to that difference, a knowledge that's not for its own sake, but for the sake of picking shoes or for the sake of making dinner or whatever it might be, right, is called surva or slave. And this is very common, you know, right, through Shakespeare's time to speak of the surva arts, and sometimes they call it mechanical arts. But by liberal knowledge, it would be a knowledge that's desirable for its own sake. And what we call the liberal arts is like the beginning of that knowledge, knowledge that's what I'm saying. But wisdom is the most liberal in the end. But no, so you can reason from it being looking knowledge to it being liberal. Because looking means it's for the sake of doing, right? For its own sake. And therefore it's liberal and free, right? But as we call a man free, that is for himself and not for another. So this alone is free among the sciences, because to some extent, they're all studying for the sake ultimately of wisdom, right? But this alone is only for that, you might say, for the sake of itself, right? There's a little passage of Thomas, which says, I study the body, he says, so I can study the soul. And I study the soul, he says, so I can study the angels. And I study the angels so I can study God. And that's it. And that's that guy with the alphabet. So the knowledge of God is what? The first cause is most for its own sake, right? See? The lower kinds of knowledge is the most for its own sake, right? Now, you can see Aristotle's common sense here in the experiment. Because what is the condition of man? There's all kinds of needs, right? And in many, you know, conditions of man, he could spend his whole day trying to get the necessities of life, and he's still not going to get them every day, right? So he says, hence it might justly be thought that it is not human possession. Now, he's not contradicting himself when he talked before about the natural desire to know, right? Because that indicated in some ways possible, right? But in saying it's not human possession, he means it's not the sort of thing that you can use and pursue any time you want to. Because you have all these practical needs, right? For in many ways, he says, the nature of man is enslaved. Some people point to this as an indication to ourselves of some awareness of the effects of which I've said, right? But in a way, my reason is enslaved to my body and its needs, right? And to some extent, I've got to paint the house this summer, and my reason is enslaved to my house, right? Mm-hmm. And then I got to, you know, food, a little money to buy the food, right? Okay? So there's some kinds of slavery we can't avoid, right? But then I used to teach the philosophy of all the old days, talking about slavery system. Today, each man is his own slave, he says. You see? So it says to me, if you have a house or a yard, you know, most likely you're going to be cutting the grass yourself and paying the house yourself, you know. Unless you have an awful lot of money, right? So in a way, you're enslaved to your possession, right? You're enslaved to your what? Car, right? I get up here and say, someday I'll get a fat tag. It's a lot of it. So we're out there, I don't show up, you know. It's the day I get the fat car. You know how complicated it is. You know, we're out on the comfy side there and you've got to, you know, get something to toy or something, right? Now, in addition to that, then our slaves, what? Of their passion, right? I was quoting Hamlet's words there. Give me that man that is not passion slave. So some men are a slave of their own fear. Some men are a slave of their own anger, right? Some men are a slave of their desire to eat or drink or their sexual desire, right? Men are very often enslaved to some passion, right? And that makes it difficult for them to pursue now. It's altogether liberal for its own sake, right? You know, they can maybe do something about being enslaved to their passions, but they can't do much about being enslaved to their body in a way. It's got to be fed, right? Their car, their house, whatever it is. They have to have in their society, right? And then we're enslaved to what? Custom, right? Shakespeare calls custom a tyrant, right? Enslaved to fashion. You know what? You know what I'm saying to fashion, right? You wear the same clothes every day. You've been freed from one kind of unnecessary slavery, right? And Aristotle, if I'm continuing that, quotes the poet, because of what the rejected poet says. Thus, according to Simonides, the poet, God alone could have this honor, right? As if this is more a divine possession than a human possession. This knowledge is desirable for its own sake. Man, however, is not willing to seek knowledge for itself. Now, that's a very old idea. And man's natural religion is going to do that. If you look in the world of the story there, Neal, in the best world history book we have called it, in the beginning there, he has a picture of a Sumerian religious base, and it's got three levels on the base. The lowest level are the beasts, the middle level is the men, and the highest level are the gods, right? And apparently the theology behind it is that when the animals were created to relieve man in some of his labor, like the horse and the ox and so on, right? And man is created to relieve the gods of labor, right? So it's only the gods. This is what the gods are. It's only the gods that have this knowledge for itself, right? And then if you try to pursue that knowledge, you're trying to pursue a divine prerogative, and God will be envious to you, right? Okay? And she says, if the poets are saying something, right, and the divine is able to envious, it's likely especially to happen about this. It's an excellent analogy. And unfortunately, all those excel in knowledge, right? But then he rejects his opinion, not the poet, right? But the divine is not able to be envious, right? I know it's envious to form a sadness in God, right? And envy is over what? The good of another that seems to prevent your good, right? Nothing can prevent bad goods, right? So Aristotle is saying it's impossible for God to be envious. And according to your problems, poets say many false things. Notice what Christ says there about Martha and Mary. Mary represents what? Contemplative. And Martha the practical, right? And Martha comes to complain to Christ about Mary not helping her in the New Yorker. And Christ says, Mary hath chosen the better part. And second, it shall not be taken away from Martha. And when they comment on that, Thomas and the Church Fathers, they say, well, there's two lives, the contemplative life and the active life, right? And just like Rachel and Leah represent those two lives in the Old Testament, so there's two women in the New Testament. But the active life is up to the end of this life, and the active life begins in this life and continues in a fuller way in the next life. So Mary hath chosen the better part, and that's the part of the fact she stayed at the eternal, right? And it shall not be taken away from her and continues in this life. So he's not envious, obviously, right? Christ, right? He wants to share that knowledge, which he has in himself. Now he comes to the fourth, and the crowning attributes, you know? And also the third one, in a way, has indicated that this is something more divine about this knowledge. And you might, right? And so that makes a transition to this being the most divine knowledge, you know? And therefore, it's being the most honorable and the best knowledge. Nor must any other knowledge be thought to be more honorable, for the most divine is the most honorable one. But now he's going to show in what way this knowledge is most divine. He says there are two ways you could call knowledge divine. What are the two ways? There's two ways you can speak of knowledge as divine, right? Just as there's two ways you can speak of knowledge as human. It's knowledge that human beings have, right? Or it's knowledge about human beings, right? And some knowledge might be human in one way, not the other. But some knowledge, you know, with this terrible word humanities, right? It's supposed to be human in both senses, right? Human in the sense that human beings have it. But they also have chemistry, right? But human also in the sense that it's about human beings, right? So Aristotle's going to argue that wisdom is divine, in both senses of divine. It's about God, and it's a kind of knowledge that God most of all would have. The most divine is only two ways it's going to be said. For that which God most of all would have is the most divine of science. And if it were a divine thing, right? Two ways you can call knowledge divine. It's about God, or God has it. This alone has both of them. For God seems to all to give them the causes. And you end up at this point. You've got to do that in the book as well, right? That's the point. But he's taking the common, reasonable opinion of the big philosophers that God seems to among all to be among the first causes, right? So this knowledge, the wisdom is about the first causes, and the first causes of God includes God, then obviously wisdom is about God, right? That's the syllabus, right? And then, from the common opinion, you know, of Pythagoras and Heraclitus, Socrates and Plato, all the great Greek philosophers, who either they wouldn't want to say that man is wise at all, in a free way, right? Either God alone is wise, or else was he a man is wise in a perfect way, right? So he says, such knowledge God alone, or most of all, would have. So if you take wisdom in the fullest sense, God alone would have this knowledge, or God would have it most of all, right? We'd have it somewhat perfect, right? So notice the main soldiers in there, right? Wisdom is the most divine knowledge. The most divine knowledge is the most honorable knowledge, right? Therefore, wisdom is the most honorable knowledge, right? Now he thinks it's obvious that what is most divine is the most honorable, right? But the minor premise that this is the most divine, he says it's about to be divine in two ways, and in both ways it's to be divine, right? It seems to be about God, he proves that, but in the middle term, that this is about the first causes, and his cause is God, right? That religion is about God, and then... He proves that God most of all had this from the common opinion of all the lines from the law. Now, in the next paragraph, he says, all other kinds of knowledge were necessary to this, but none is, what, better. So he's saying that this is not only the most honorable knowledge, but he's, what, next knowledge. He disagrees with what he says there in the, in the game of the item, he says that one knowledge is better than another because it's more certain or because it's about a better thing, right? But in the parts of animals, he says that the criterion about being about a better thing is more important. And he gives a very good example in a very kind of scripture. He says, just as the glimpse, he says, of those we love is more to us than a leisurely view of those who don't care for them. So I give students the example, you know, you're working for the boss who's for much, you know, you see the boss, clearly all day long watching you to make sure you're here. And then they do tell you to run down two or three blocks to see your girlfriend or something, right? Or you see your fourth lady over there, right? And you enjoy more of a little glimpse of her than this long view of the boss, you know. You see? So you have to see it perfectly in the way below, right? So. So this knowledge then is what? It's looking now, it's not practical, right? It's liberal and not servile, right? It's not a human possession, right? But it's the most honorable and the best knowledge because it's the most divine knowledge. But notice how he says all other kinds of knowledge are more necessary, right? And it's nice to see a contrast between this is very better. It asks, which is better, to breathe or to philosophize? But they all say to breathe, right? And he said, well now, why do you say to breathe is better than to philosophize? Of course, not breathing or to breathing else, right? I'm going to say to them, well that shows that it's unnecessary, right? But do you live for the sake of breathing or do you breathe for the sake of doing other things in life? If you breathe for the sake of something else that you want to do and you have to breathe the way to do it and that other thing is what's better, right? The end is always better. So this is the best knowledge of other kinds of knowledge like carpentry and hooking and more necessary. It is necessary, Albert, to place the possession of this in the opposite for us of the searches in the beginning. For all begin, as we have said, from wondering if things are thus. And it's about things that happen wonderfully by chance. And even the Philomotaphs, you read the great, you know, things like Idoquus the King or something like that, in Shakespeare's great tragedies, you see how these chance events are always under, right? Aristotle gives a very simple example in the critics there where somebody murdered somebody, right? And they didn't discover who had done the murder, right? The man murdered who was a very great citizen so he set up a large statue in the marketplace, right? One day there's a big festival and there's a huge crowd, you know, and the statue falls over on top of something and kills him. Just so it fell on. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. The man had murdered, right? And you know, how about the end coming to death, right? You've got these two powerful noble families of Arona, right? Who are feuding and out to the point of shedding blood, right? Hate each other, right? And their only son and their only daughter, right? Fall in love, right? And finally reconciled, right? To the death of him. So the duke again, you know, grabs these two guys, you know, you know, says heaven has found means to punish you for a year of the time. It seems to be some significance there, right? They don't hate each other so much, right? They should lose their only son, their one, and their God, right? To the love of the son and their only son, and their God, right? It seems to be something hidden there, right? That arouses wonder, extremely wonderful issues. Or about the turnings of the sun, he says, right? The sun goes up the sky, right? In different times they are slower and higher in the sky. And it takes the most famous example from the geometry. The Greeks discovered that the diagonal of the square and the side are not invincible. They're amazing, right? That's contrary to what they expected, right? And Tom Sequine is stopping on this, you know, he says that even things that we don't know the cause of, they don't arouse our wonder so much, you're familiar, right? But if something conjured what we expect takes place, right? Then we wonder about the cause, right? If I had to blow this glass and go to the ground and go, right? You wouldn't wonder why, would you? Even though Einstein says we don't know why it's going to fall to the ground. And so I didn't do and he says, I don't know why either. But if I had to pull this glass and went up, they didn't wonder why it went up, right? Because it's conjuring what you expect. And Einstein, when he talks about wondering, mentions that same point, that it's something that conjuring what you expect. When his father got one magnet, he had to experience the magnet, and the magnet seemed to move something about being in contact with him. And it amazed him, right? Because his experience of one body moving another was always through what? Contact, right? And here, this is the non-contact, apparently, moving, and how's the end of it? In fact, I think it was finished. My God, the key man, you shouldn't wonder, right? So at the end of philosophy, you know, something better than wondering, you know, I have my knowledge, right? Now the last paragraph here on page five is the epilogue, right? And he recounts what he's done in the third reading first, right? What is the nature of the knowledge sought that has been set? It's looking knowledge, it's liberal or free, right? It's not human possession, but it's the most honorable and best knowledge that's the most divine knowledge, right? And what is the goal that the investigation and the whole knowledge overruled must reach? And that's the first cause. The first thought doesn't arrive at the knowledge of the first causes until the second half of the 12th book. Once he writes it, God, now, it's the first thought. And the goal, So, that's what the philosopher is a lover-up. It's not true that we should do what it is. Now, the next question is how must the philosopher or love this tonight? And there's about five things, four or five things you have to say about this. The first and most basic thing to really be called a philosopher to have a right to the name of a philosopher, right? No one do you have to love wisdom, but you have to love wisdom for its own sake. If I love wisdom for the sake of making money, or I love wisdom for the sake of power it gives me, or if I love wisdom for the sake of the honor and glory that the promise of the incarnate is wise, right? Am I really a lover or wisdom? No. They tell the student that the man loves the woman for her money. Does he really love the woman? And if the woman gets suspicious and says, do you love me or my money, and in a fit of honesty he says, I love you for your money, she undoubtedly will follow that because he didn't know he loved me. Right? So if I don't love wisdom for its own sake, if I love it for the sake of honor and glory, I'm a song, right? If I love it for the sake of power, I'm a lover of power, right? That's the first thing. You have to love wisdom for its own sake to be a good philosopher in your full sense. Now, if I love more than wisdom for its own sake, let's say I love candy for its own sake. If I love candy more than wisdom, would you call me a philosopher? Hmm. You'd call me a lover of candy. When I was a little boy, I thought my father I thought my father was a very foolish man, because, if there's money now, you could fill the refrigerator with orange soda, grape soda, I thought my father would be a good friend. I thought my father I thought my father would be a good friend. It's a little corn grocery store, you know, from the one-armed man, and in the front of the little store, there's this big water pool, you know, orange, and you get that money to go and go buy it, and I always, you know, so I said, I probably know how to use his money, obviously, you know, with his money, you know, with his money, you know, the whole refrigerator, you know, sold it, sold all day long, he's a happy man, right? My father gave my brother Richard ten cents a week an ounce, he gave my brother Marcus five cents a week, me being the youngest, and in those days, he could buy corn and soda for five cents, I thought, what do you do, he went for two cents an ounce, he could go down to the penny candy store and blow the two cents, he could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you if you love it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you could buy it, you