I just started my Philosophy school at TMU. I’m very excited. I only had one class on Critical Thinking yesterday, but this is already looking like it will be epic fun.
My first Philosophy class is tomorrow and there was this podcast suggested as something to listen to before class: https://historyofphilosophy.net/plato-charmides-euthydemus
In the podcast there is a story of the two sophist brothers Euthydemus and Dionysodorus who apparently make a bad argument that if a dog has puppies then he is a father, and that if that dog is your dog, then it is your father. While I see how it might be a useless argument, I don’t think it’s a bad one.
For example, if there are three dogs with puppies, and all three are your dogs, then it is somewhat understandable if you say “These are my fathers”. A little bit like in the “Who’s your daddy?” sentence (well, maybe not exactly depending on how you hear it :)) -… but anyway, “These [three dogs] are my [proud] daddies [of some puppies]”. Seems understandable to me. Even if a bit weird.
So I can’t say the argument that the dog is your father is a bad one. It’s just that English needs to be interpreted in context and you can’t judge the argument by interpreting the sentence that carries it in any of the many ways possible if context doesn’t exist.
One Comment