Pynchon & Math (Aristotle vs. Plato)

[Paul Mackin]

On 1/25/2013 2:07 AM, Prashant Kumar wrote:
> The interesting thing about this dichotomy (in the proper approach to 
> Ethics) you mention is that it presupposes a  Platonic conception of 
> mathematics; mathematics as a menagerie of axiomatically true pieces 
> of abstraction.
>
> A fallibilistic conception of mathematics (the mathematical empiricism 
> of Quine and Putnam), itself descended from the american pragmatists, 
> which conceives of mathematical theorems as contingent truths, will 
> result in a more nebulous notion of precision.
>
> I would argue this sort of naturalism, nature as a series of 
> convenient but contingent truths, is a staple of american fiction more 
> generally. For example, look at how Pynchon handles the feud between 
> the Quaternionists and the Vectorists in AtD.


"Mathematics once seemed the way--the internal life of numbers came as a 
revelation to me, perhaps as it might have to a Pythagorean apprentice 
long ago in Crotona--a reflection of some less accessible reality, 
through close study of which one might learn to pass on beyond the 
difficult given world."

AtD. p. 749.

P


>
> P.
>
> On 24 January 2013 22:57, alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com 
> <mailto:alicewellintown at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     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
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130125/19a13e19/attachment.html>