A couple of days ago, I wrote up a thought that I was afraid sounds better than it is. But now I think maybe it isn’t as hollow as I’d thought.

The idea was this: Aristotle says that to know x is to place x into a relationship of similarity and difference: A robin is a type of bird (same as all other birds) but is a unique species of bird (different from all other birds). This is a world-changing insight, especially since Aristotle thought it was true not just of knowledge but of reality. But as our belief in a single, uninterpreted reality — or our ability to know a single reality — falters, we find ourselves in a global network of conversations. And conversations iterate differences on the ground of shared beliefs — difference and similarity.

I was worried that the formal similarity between Aristotle’s idea and the nature of conversation was too facile. But this morning I think there’s also something right. In these billions of conversations, we attempt to work out what’s true. But, especially as the conversation goes global and involves people with deep differences, we (= I) have no hope of ever resolving issues and creating anything like an eternal tree of knowledge. That dream of Reason is gone. (Appropriate exceptions admitted.) Instead, for the rest of our time on the planet, we will be iterating differences, hopefully on an increasing ground of commonality. But we’re never going to all agree and fall silent. That’s not even a desirable outcome.

So, I think maybe I do believe that knowledge is becoming the eternality of conversations dancing difference over common ground.

(I reserve the right to change my mind tomorrow.) [Technorati tags: EverythingIsMiscellaneous aristotle philosophy]

Categories: Uncategorized dw