Pynchon & Math (Aristotle vs. Plato)

[alice wellintown]

Several critical studies examine Pynchon and the American Pragmatists.

I think a good place to turn is to Aristotle. Here in an Introduction
we see a basic difference in Aristotle from Plato and Socrates, and
specifically, on Ethics. The wisdom of Aristotle is that he accepts
the idea that it is wise to examine or explore a topic only so far as
the topic permits, that there is an exhaustion point, and that in
Ethics, and in Politics, the topic does not allow for examination as
it does in other sciences.

Is the application of math to Ethics and Politics Fascist? Maybe.
Maybe something in that GR....

Is Plato a Fascist?

No, but the math....

The main difference between Plato and Aristotle is this: Plato thought
ethics was an exact (theoretical) science; Aristotle thought precision
was extremely difficult in a science such as ethics. Please note that
"science" is being used in its ancient sense of knowledge in general.

THE PROPER METHOD FOR ETHICS (Bk. I, Sec. 3)

>From ethics one can expect only as much precision as the subject
matter allows. This is opposite to Plato's belief, because it does not
allow for any mathematical exactness. Does this mean, then, that moral
rules are "conventions," made up or created by humans? No, they are
natural, but they are not like Plato's immutable forms. Aristotle
avoids ethical relativism because of his confidence in human reason
and experience to decide on general courses of action.

Plato approached ethical questions with a formal, abstract approach,
analyzing each just as he would analyze a math problem. Aristotle,
though, believed that because of all the human variables found in
ethics (but not found in the formal sciences), mathematical precision
was impossible.

http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/103/aristotle.htm