Logic (2016)
32. Senses of Before and After, and the Eight Senses of 'In' as Ways of Thinking Out
Class of 2017-03-09
https://berquistcourse.com/course/philosophy/2-logic-2016/032-senses-of-before-and-after-and-the-eight-senses-of-in-as/

[0:00] The Father, the Son, Holy Spirit, Amen. God our enlightenment move us, God, to know and love and praise you. Help us, God, to know and love and praise you. Guardian angels strengthen the lights of our minds, order and illumine our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. Saint Thomas Aquinas, angelic doctor. Help us to understand all that you've written. Father, Son, Holy Spirit, Amen. I was reading Thomas today about the prophecy writer, the sentences, and do the angels help in prophecy?

[0:36] Right. Well, there's two things involved in prophecy. What's most proper to the prophet is that he has his imagination stirred, right? Well, the angels can do that, right? Huh? But what about the other part, which is the light given by God to judge these things, right? Well, that light comes from God, right? But he says, you know, that the angel helps to proportion that light to us, huh?

[1:04] Which in a way is like the angels. You know, we always say that the this angel is is enlightening the angels, say two ranks below him, right? They're going through an intermediate one who's more proportioned to that, huh? Yeah. That's kind of interesting, huh? To see that the angels, interesting quotes too about the angels being important. That reminds me, of what Hopkins said about the Virgin Mary compared to the air we breathe.

[1:33] She said, "if the sun, we didn't have the atmosphere, the sun would burn us. So the atmosphere, he says, leaves his light sifted to suit our sight

[1:49] I was torturing my students last night, so somebody could testify. And I said, you know, Aristotle begins with the dianima, you know, by saying that all knowledge is such as good, right?

[2:05] But one knowledge is what better than another, right? Huh? So he's starting to introduce an order in the fourth sense of order, right? Huh? Okay. And so I was saying, you know, the knowledge of the body is good, but the knowledge of the what is better, and why is it better? It's a better thing. Yeah, yeah. And then I said the knowledge of the soul is good, right?

[2:36] But the knowledge of the angels is better. Why? Was it because the angels are a greater thing than the than the souls, right? And then the knowledge of the angels is good, right? The knowledge of God is better. Why? Because God is really that much better, right? Huh? Okay. But notice in that thing, huh? You're looking before and after, and what senses of the before and after do we have in the categories?

[3:04] What senses are you looking before and after? What? Fourth sense? The fourth sense, yeah. Because you're saying how one knowledge is better than another, That's the fourth sense, better, right? But is there another sense that you're looking before and after besides that in this discourse?

[3:24] Is it necessary for us in the third sense to know the lesser good before we know the greater good? So would that be? Yeah, but maybe more directly is if all knowledge is such as good, right? Huh? And he's going to say that, but one knowledge is better than another, right? Huh? Then the question arises, why? Why is one knowledge better than another? And then you're looking before and after in what sense?

[4:01] Cause and effect. Because why look for the cause, right? Huh? Okay. You're saying, well, the reason why one knowledge is better than another, the main reason is because it's about a better thing. Now then you could ask again, you know, well, why is the soul better than the body, right? And you'd again be looking before and after in the sense of what cause and effect, huh? When you ask why, you're looking before in the sense of what cause, right?

[4:30] When you try to see what the effect of a cause would be, you're looking after, right? But that's that sense that he mentions there, right? So it's kind of striking, you know. That's not one of the four central senses, but I see that there are five chief senses, right? there, but four central senses in order, right? And that fifth sense kind of is attached, especially to the second sense by its proximity, but it's a different sense, nevertheless, and it's used here in talking about why one is better than another, right?

[5:03] You have to know why one knowledge is better than another before you can see that the knowledge of the soul is before the knowledge of the body in the sense of being better knowledge, right? And the knowledge of the angels, better knowledge of the what soul, right? Okay.

[5:22] Now if you ask the question, you know, should you study the soul before you study the angels? See, and you know many of the great authors say that this is the doorway for us to know these immaterial things. Well, you might then say, but why should you what study the soul before the body? I mean, for the angels, right? Huh? And then you'd have to look before and after in the sense of cause and effect, right?

[5:50] In order to see the before and after in knowledge, right? Huh? Now shows you how picky things those are, and how good was it Aristotle mentioning that, right? Okay. Now, we've talked a lot about distinction, right? Okay. Now, would you say that confused

[6:16] knowledge is before distinct knowledge? Isn't distinct knowledge better than confused knowledge? Different sense of before. Yeah. So in the fourth sense, distinct knowledge is before confused knowledge, right?

[6:50] Because it's more perfect knowledge, right? Okay. But in the third sense of before, confused knowledge is before what? Distinct knowledge, right? And so when you see a distinction, you're moving from the confusion, right, to distinct knowledge. But now, someone asked you,

[7:12] why is confused knowledge before distinct knowledge? And Aristotle in the first, the proemium to the eight books of natural of the Natural Hearing, which I insist upon calling correctly, hearing St. Francis de Boncoye correct me, right? But they call it the physics, right? He shows by kinds of examples, right, that

[7:36] we know things in the confused way way before distinctly. But why do we know things the confused way before we know them distinctly? He says it's true both about the senses and about reason, right? Okay. So if you see a beautiful girl, it takes a little while to study her, right, to know her more distinctly, right? Now, and if you hear the last moment of Jupiter symphony, right?

[8:04] Now, you have to go back when Warren Murray tells you that he's combining four or five melodies together there, right? And it's news to me. You've got to know the form of the Jupiter symphony before I do this, right? And so my sense to know things in a what? Confused way before I know them distinctly. That's same thing for my recent, huh? Aristotle says we name a thing before we what?

[8:31] Define it, right? And you have to know a thing very distinctly to name it. I always remember a comic strip when I was a little kid there, and the older guy there was with the younger woman, and she was talking about she's in love with somebody or something, you know. He says that's a big word. He says, "You sure you know what it means? " I said, "You mean this?

[8:57] This is pretty good for a comic strip, you know. " You all get the two, but not the thing they love somebody, you know, and they don't know what they what they mean by love, right? Okay. So you have confused out right now. Okay. Now, if you ask yourself, this is a before and after in the third sense, right? But now, if you ask, why do the senses and both the senses and reason, why do both of them know things in a what confused way before distinctly?

[9:30] Now you're looking before and after in what sense? What? The cause. Yeah, fifth sense that Aristotle gives. He's kind of he's still giving the four senses and then he seems like an afterthought, which is crazy. It's kind of funny to hear the afterthought after he's been explaining before and after, right? But he brings in some sense, right? Which I insist doesn't come fifth in order, but it's lays alongside. The second sense, right, is the closest to that, right?

[10:04] Okay. So why is confused knowledge before distinct knowledge? If distinct knowledge came before confused knowledge, we wouldn't have to look for distinctions, would we? And Thomas wouldn't be making distinctions or pointing out distinctions all the time, right? We would be looking before and after. So why? What does he start to bring out there about the senses last night?

[10:34] You know, when you talk about the abilities or the powers of the soul, right? And sometimes they call them the powers of the soul, right? I like to call them the abilities of the soul, right? I even took the liberty of shortening Shakespeare's definition, right? Capability to ability, right? But the reason why I like the word ability better than the word power is that there's a distinction between a what?

[11:05] Active ability, right? And a what? Passive ability, right? So the carpenter who made this table, right? He was able to make this what? Table, right? But you could say that the wood was able to be formed. Two different kinds of ability. And you can use ability, the word ability, for both of these, right? And so I often point out the fact that we have words like. Well, first of all, point out what Aristotle points out.

[11:43] that the first sense of ability is the active sense of ability. okay? So when this man over here is playing his cello, right now, we see his ability, right? But you wouldn't think of the cellist having ability, would you? When the great concert pianist is playing, you know, you can see his ability, right? You don't think of the pianist having ability, do you? Would you? No, it's just a mighty ability.

[12:08] The piano's, right now. No, the piano doesn't. This is not. And but yet you could say the piano is able to be played, right now. Okay. And then we have all these words with able, like burnable, breakable, beatable, right? Which are by some ability. Use the word able, right? Okay. So able is used even in daily speech for an ability that is an ability to undergo, as well as an ability to act upon.

[12:43] The one is more known. Why the word power is kind of what? It's kind of stuck on the first meaning in English, at least, right? And it's not moved, right? Okay. I would say the word here was was was powerful, right? Not so much, you know, but it was able to be what formed, yeah. So that's why I prefer the word ability, right? The word power, okay.

[13:14] Now even having some lot of my friends use the word potency, as Thomas uses all the time, but potency, even with trans, you know, making a word image, it seems to be kind of stuck in the first sense too, doesn't it? The word able is very much, huh? Breakable, buildable, capable, burnable, destructible. All these kinds of ability, you know, are best sense, huh? What does Aristotle point out?

[13:45] He says there's got to be some connection between the what abilities of the soul and their what act and their object, right? Huh? And so he says they're going to what distinguish the abilities by the act for which they are an ability. That seems simple enough, right? So the ability to hear, the abilities to see are different. The seeing and hearing are different, right? But seeing and hearing are both sensing, and how you distinguish them: well, the one is sensing sound, and the other is sensing color or light.

[14:21] Okay. So basically, you distinguish the powers by their what object, right? Okay. Well, then there is a distinction that Aristotle sees. huh, which he gives a whole book to in Book Nine of Wisdom, huh? And what does he do in Book Nine of Wisdom?

[14:42] Yeah, and in the first there are three parts of the book, right? Books are divided into two or three, you know. And the first two parts of the Book Nine are distinguishing the senses of ability and the senses of what? Of act. Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, yes, shaming the ability. After all you've said, yeah. You see how his bad habits, you know, huh? See, that's custom. Custom's a dangerous thing, right?

[15:06] Huh? We're working on. We'll beat it into it. He's beautiful. Let's see, if he's beautiful, quickable Furnival. Okay. Well, what's the connection between the ability and the object, right? Huh? What's the relation between them, right? Now, if you go back to what we studied about relation, relations are based either upon quantity or upon acting upon undergoing, right? And what's going to be the connection between the object and the ability?

[15:57] Yeah, or vice versa, right? Now it's interesting. Aristotle takes up the abilities of the soul, right? The first ones he takes up are the most common ones, which even the plants share with the animals, right? The ability to what nourish themselves, right? The ability to grow, the ability to reproduce. Is this an active ability or an undergoing ability? Yeah, same. Then when you get to the senses, you find out that what it seems to be, what?

[16:31] More undergoing. Yeah, it seems like sound acts upon your ear, right? If you listen to the wrong kind of music, you can even go deaf, right? Because the way it acts upon your ear right And color acts upon your what eyes, right? And if you you know the crack open French during the Spanish Civil War there, you know, you're blind, right? With the light just shining in your eye all the time.

[16:56] And watch out the sun there, you know, and the change of the it's getting covered over, you know. Watch out these things. So one is acting upon the what? Yeah, right. Now later on, we have a Wednesday night class that's coming to the understanding part of the soul, right? Now, but it's going to have the object acting upon the ability, or the ability acting upon the object, which will be.

[17:31] Oh my goodness, what a good student he is! Okay. Now it's kind of interesting the way Aristotle, you know, he's taking the he's going from the general to the particular, right? You do that because you go from the confused to the distinct. The general is confused compared to the particular, right? And it's interesting he takes up the most general first, right? The plant powers, the living powers, and then the sense powers, and then finally the what understanding powers.

[17:59] But the first one seems to be what just active powers, right? The second one undergoing ones, the five senses, and then the there is both, right? We move forward, right here.

[18:15] Now you can see that this is soul, right? You know, this is I like your self-dressing, you know. What do you use your self-dressing?

[18:33] You see. And I was talking to my brother Mark, you know, when he's out in California, and he goes into the wine tasting room of one of the vineyards there, and they had a wine, you know, it's one of these called Burgundy or something, but it's actually a mixture of different grapes, huh? And each house has got its own red Vicks, right? So my brother, you know, was tasting it.

[19:00] So I said, "What are you using there?" And you know, who else? This guy. What's he trying to say? Happens, you know. Say, you know, he just, you know, saying, "gosh I said, don't you have this?" And he starts to name the things that are in there, right? And he says, "Come to the back room here. Taste all these combinations. Tell me which one you think is the best."

[19:21] You know. So he went for this, you know, person there. But my brother Mark was going to do that when he first went out to California, right? You know. And I couldn't do it, you know. There was a journey, and so was a confused knowledge there, right? Now, why is it that both the senses and the undergoing reason, right, know things in a confused way before distinctly?

[19:53] Why? Maybe? They have to go from ability to act. Yeah. yeah. So, which is more actual, and which is more just an ability, right? Well, obviously confused knowledge is between not knowing a thing at all and knowing it what Distinctly, right? So, if sensing is an undergoing, right? Is sensing is a going from ability to act, right? And just I would say understanding is also kind of undergoing, as far as the undergoing understanding is concerned.

[20:42] Then you're going to know things in a confused way before you know them distinctly, right? Confused knowledge is actuality, right, in comparison to ignorance, right? When the mind is ignorant, but compared to distinct knowledge, is still in some way inability. So it naturally comes before this, right? Big news, right? It's interesting that you're seeing one before and after because you saw what another before and after, right?

[21:18] And what is before and after the cause and effect, and everything? Beautiful, beautiful. Now, I forget how far we got about into the second act last time, right? We just started. yeah. Yeah, let's.

[21:42] Now, I was torturing my students last night with the eight senses of in, which I keep on coming back to, and I had a course from Charles De Koninck at Laval.

[22:00] I. Had one course on Book One of Natural Hearing, and another course on Book Two. These are all semester courses. Had 2, 1 course on uh, the definition of motion. another semester, one course on place, which is half of Book 4, kind of. and another semester course on time, which is another one, right? Well, De Koninck used to say that every respectable word in philosophy is equivocal by reason, And uh, but he had, great love for the eight senses of what in, right?

[22:43] Because that comes into the what fourth book when Aristotle's talking about place, right? Because the first sense of in is to be in this room, right? To be in some place. And then Aristotle gives in the text that we have the eight chief senses or the eight central senses. I call them sometimes. Some people just get attached ones sometimes to the sides of it, right? But there's eight central senses, eight chief senses.

[23:16] But in the text that comes down to us, he doesn't order them like he does in the fifth book of what, wisdom, right? Where he orders the word beginning and the word end and so on. So Thomas says we're going to order them. but in the way Aristotle showed us. And take the most known meaning, right? Then you order the other senses by their connection to that one by one, right?

[23:45] Okay. And so you get how many senses? Yeah. Eight, eight senses, right? Now, here's some nice English here. Said to my student up at the the uh, Benedictine monastery, you know, let us think about second act, right? Okay.

[24:21] Now, when you think about something, right? You think about something before you do what? It comes next. Understanding. Understanding. Well, something a little closer to what we've got here in words, huh? Thinking about? Yeah, yeah. You think about something before you think out something, right? Okay.

[24:58] So, so I was curious last night and I yesterday, so I said, "I'll look at Origins," right? That's a book that was recommended by the linguist to me as you know a one-volume edition of etymology in the English. language, huh? It's done by the great master, of Partridge, right? So I looked up the word "about," huh? And what does the word "about" mean originally? huh? Going back in middle British and so on.

[25:33] It means outside, right? So when you're thinking about something, you're kind of going outside of it and knowing something in a way, kind of outward way before you know it, but inside, inward. Yeah, yeah. By thinking out means to bring out something that is. In the thing you are thinking about, okay. So thinking about comes before thinking out, and this points out or touches upon another before and after in our knowledge, right?

[26:06] One of the most universal before and afters is the confused before the distinct, right? But the another way is that we know things in a what outward way first before we know them what inwardly, right? Now, why is that?

[26:28] It's a different reason why we know things in an outward way before inwardly, although it's somewhat similar, right, to knowing things in a confused way before distinctly. Well, when we say that we know things in a confused way before we know them distinctly, this is true about the senses in themselves and reason in itself. They both go for ability to act, and therefore they know things in a confused way before distinctly.

[26:56] But what's the reason why we know things in an outward way before we know them what inwardly? It's always because we're dealing with singulars, we're sensing singulars, but we come to get us we abstract out their essence, you could say, or is that Okay? universals going from singulars to universals. The great Heraclitus said, "that nature loves to hide, right? And why does nature love to hide? Right?

[27:27] " Excuse me, ask my colleagues that something. But the point is, the nature is a cause within, right? What's within is hidden to us at the beginning, right? So because we start with our senses. Yeah, yeah. The senses know things in an outward way, and reason tries to put them inwardly. Okay. Now Thomas, in Latin, the word is even more suggested here because the word "intelligere, Thomas gives us the etymology of it, intus legere, right?

[28:02] To read within, right? And so he's touching on the fact that reason in understanding knows things inwardly in the way the senses don't. And so what happens? When I was a little boy, there they made me learn the definition of sacrament. The definition of sacrament that I memorized and still know was an outward sign instituted by Christ to give grace. Now,

[28:38] what did they mean by an outward sign? Sensible. Yeah. Okay. So one reason why we know things. An outward way before we know them inwardly is because we sense before we what understand right before we will sense and understand it right. It's a little different from confused and distinct then right, but it's similar right. Okay.

[29:09] Now, how many senses are there of thinking out something? Well, I'm pretty smart when I look at the opposite of out, which is what in, and now I can go with Aristotle and Thomas in the fourth book of Natural Hearing, right, and there are eight senses of what to in or to be in right. Okay. And at least in six of those eight senses right, they correspond to a different sense of thinking out right.

[29:49] Now, what's the first sense of in or to be in right? What's the first sense? of place Yeah, to be in place right. I am in this room, right? You are in this room, right? First sense of to be in. And the Greeks are so taken up with this that they said that whatever is must be somewhere. If it isn't somewhere, it doesn't exist.

[30:33] Someone says, "Where is God?" It's a problem, right? You can't tell the place. Now, what's the second sense to be in, right? Well, as a part in a whole. In the first sense, the word the composed whole, right?

[31:01] That's the closest, right? I am in this room. You are in this room. These chairs and tables are in this room, right? But I've got teeth in my mouth. Are my teeth in my mouth in the same way that you are in this room?

[31:22] No, because my teeth are in my mouth; they're not false teeth. They're in my mouth as in a what? As a part of my mouth, right? Because my tongue is a part of my mouth. So, you are really a part of this room, Jason? Are you, Joshua? No.

[31:49] You might be the old professor in this room all the time. You're just part of the room. You are part of it, right? Okay. Now, if you hit me in the mouth and my tooth comes out, then it's in my mouth It's in a what place? Yeah. See how close it is, right? Okay. But you're not glued to the chair you're sitting on The chair is not attached to the floor and so on, right?

[32:13] Okay. So, a part in a composed whole. Now, what's the third sense that Aristotle gives or Thomas gives? Well, he gives the one of the genus in the species.

[32:38] Okay. And you put to this sense attached difference in the species, right? Okay. Now, genus in a sense is part of the definition, of species, right? The differences are the other parts, right? Okay. This is a little different kind of whole and part than this one right here. Okay. Then the fourth sense is an even more distant sense of part and whole, which would be the reverse of this: the species in the what?

[33:16] In the genus. You say, how can that be? How can the genus be in the species, and the species be the genus? Right? I mean, the wine is in the bottle, the bottle is not in the wine. How can they both be? How can they be in each other? Right? Food is

[33:38] in my mouth, my mouth in the food. You can't do that. That's impossible. Well, if there's one sense of in, they couldn't be in each other. could they?

[33:53] If. I'm a part of something else that other can't be part of me. Right? The same sense, right? This is a different sense, right? You dummy, huh? This is an equivocal word, right? Or equivocal by reason, right? But this is what we call the what? Universal whole, right?

[34:18] The species is in the genus, right? By the the second and third sense, are part in a what? Composed whole, right? The one is the whole we first know, right? The other one is this mental one, this definition, right? The species in the genus.

[34:42] Now, in Greek, the word for species there would be what? Eidos, which is also a word for what? Form, right? What's the next sense? Form and matter.

[35:09] And that is the what fifth sense, right? Okay. Now he comes back upon whole and part again, right? And he says that form is to matter a bit like whole is to what? Parts.

[35:42] Now, this is tell the joke there, you know about. the guy who comes to see Oxford or some other place, right? And so they show him this building, they show this building. and they show this building and this is the name of the building. and so on, right? Okay, but now where's the university? Well, Duke University is in what? All these buildings, right? Okay. I'm going to take you on a tour of Assumption Palace, right, I'll show you the library, and I'll show you the chapel, and I'll show you the dorm, and I'll show you this academic building, and this one, and the science building, and so on But where's Assumption Palace Can you show that to me?

[36:19] Well, I don't know if I can show this by showing you the parts, right? Okay. Whole and the parts. But notice, when we define matter, we say matter is that from which something comes to be, existing what in it, and the whole comes to be from parts. So whole is to parts a little bit like form is to what matter, right? Okay.

[36:50] Now, in these two senses of in, as opposed to these here, these parts here, the part is actually in the whole, right? While the form is in matter originally, only in what ability, and the whole is in the parts only in ability, right? Okay. The cook is out there, she has all the ingredients, and dinner's in all those parts, but in ability, right? Okay. And now there's another kind of ability.

[37:24] I've got you in my power, right? Okay. And this is the active one, right? So it's in the active ability. You say, well, that sounds awfully abstract, Mr. Perkis, you know.

[37:46] I'm sorry, it's out of my hands. See what we said, right? It's out of my hands. It's not in my power to do it, right? Okay. I've got you in my power. You do what I said. See? Okay. In the active ability, right?

[38:16] That's touching upon efficient cause, right? Okay. Is a baby in his mother and father somewhere? Yeah. yeah. He has the ability to produce the baby. or at least produce the body of the baby, right? It's in the body of the baby. Okay. Now that last one goes to the other end, extrinsic causes in the what? I left my heart in San Francisco, right? My heart's not in it.

[39:02] Okay. Loved are in the end, right? So people will say this, right? I will do something. My heart's not in it. My love is not there, right? Did you say that? My heart's not in it. Okay.

[39:31] I'm a philosopher. My heart's where? Wisdom. Yeah. If. I'm a lover of God. My heart is where? In God. Yeah. Good place to be. Thank you. Yeah.

[39:48] So one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Now, how many senses are they thinking out? Right. It seems to me, without getting too sophisticated, at least in the six senses, there are six different senses, and maybe sometimes we multiply, right?

[40:26] So when I think out a division, right, division is a what? Distinction of the parts of some whole, right? So when I think out the composing parts of a whole and thinking out in the sense corresponding to the sense of in,

[40:48] my teacher Aristotle, he thought out the plot as the beginning, the middle, and end He thought out that a what? Plot as the tying of knots and the untying of knots, right?

[41:09] You take a course in anatomy, you're thinking out the what? Parts of a body, right? Huh? Okay. You learn how to spell a word, you're thinking out parts, right? That's that's the thing, right? It's something to be able to spell, right?

[41:30] I tied up with the girls and I spelled the word exercise, and oh boy, sister was I had a contest with the boys and the girls and stuff, and I didn't spell. The girls were ahead, but I was like, I get the boys a chance to catch up, and so she asked me to exercise I got it right? So I tied up the girls.

[41:54] So when you think out the parts of a composed whole, right? Huh? It corresponds to the sense of what? In, right? Huh? Okay. You think out that a definition is composed of a genus and one or more differences, right? And you think out the what? Parts of that whole, right? Genus and species Adjacent species. What thinking out is that? Let me just give myself some room here.

[42:46] But they all correspond, right? Okay. Thinking out a division, in the first sense, right? A division is a distinction of parts, right? And this is the first. Sense of whole, right? So I just call it thinking out a division, right?

[43:13] What are the parts here? Well, the genus is in the species, and also the what? Differences. So this is thinking out a definition. Could also say in a way it's thinking out the parts, right? You're thinking out the parts of the definition, right?

[43:40] But you're thinking out the definition of the thing that's being defined, right? A little different thing, right? Division, not the same thing. as Definition.

[43:59] Species in the genus, right? Well, when you think out the species of a genus, you're thinking out another kind of division, the division of a what? Universal, whole, right?

[44:15] Thinking out the division of a universal. So Aristotle thought out that the drama has tragedy and comedy, right? These are two main species, right? Berquist thought out that Shakespeare has four kinds of plays, right?

[45:00] Tragedy and comedy, and between, right? The love and friendship play, and mercy and forgiveness. Okay. In the chapter on quantity, right? Aristotle thought out the quantity can be divided into what? Yeah. How the hell do you do that? Every quantity has parts, right? And you saw that sometimes the parts meet somewhere, and sometimes they don't meet anywhere, right? So you have discrete and continuous quantity. Okay. So he's thinking out, right?

[45:40] In this what? Sense here, right? And Porphyry was thinking out the definition of genus, right? Thinking out the definition, right? Okay. Now, form and matter, right?

[46:06] Take for example, thinking out the order of something, right? That's thinking out in a sense corresponding to that what fifth sense of what, Yeah, right?

[46:38] So Aristotle thought out the order of the various what, before and after, right? He thought out order the parts of the play, right? Without some order in our knowledge, right? Now, what would be an example of thinking out the whole from the parts?

[47:17] Well, something like induction, something like induction. Yeah, it's an interesting example. I was thinking of the logic of the second act. Suppose you think out in the first act what a square is, you think out what a

[47:41] quadrilateral is, and you think out what a circle is, right? These are the parts of statements you could probably make now. My goodness, a square is a quadrilateral.

[47:57] Now where do you come with that? the whole statement. I'm thinking about what a square is and what a quadrilateral. I don't see a square as a circle. Would you?

[48:10] I was thinking about square and circle, and these are the parts of the statement that I could think out, right? A square is not a circle. Wow, am I smart, right? I got off a negative statement, right? The square is not a circle. What a great discovery, that was, right?

[48:32] And what about the axioms, right? How did I think out that a whole is more than one of its parts? Didn't I think out what the whole was and what the part is before? And then one day it dawned on me, right? I thought out that the whole is more than one of its parts. It has to be. I'm really smart, right? Thinking out things, all kinds of things.

[49:00] Okay. May not be the only example, that right? But it's one that strikes me right, appropriate for our thing here. What about inaccuracy, right?

[49:41] Well, I mean, why did some not, so I can say? If you look at my wedding book, there, right, you know, you see many pictures of Rosalie and me, right, and some relatives and so on, right? And then at the end of the book is a picture of what Eighteen grandchildren. Yeah, a few of my a few of the children right they're younger. Yeah, you know, but they were what in our ability, right?

[50:05] We'll get to start right? But let's take an example from logic, right? Huh? Did you ever think out a conclusion? Did you do that? Yeah. Now, I won't be taking up thinking

[50:29] out conclusions when you get to the logic of the third act, which is what reasoning, right? Reasoning is the third act of reasoning. But now, is the conclusion a part of the argument? Is that one of the premises or by proof? Not the whole. Yeah, that would that would be a real bad thing to have the conclusion be a premise, right? You'd be saying it is so because it is so, right?

[51:01] Okay. So the conclusion is not one of the premises. I say every woman is every mother is a woman, and no man is a what woman, and what's follows? No man is a woman. Yeah. Every mother is a woman. No man is a woman. What follows?

[51:35] No man is a mother, right? Okay. What follows, right? But was the conclusion one of the premises? No. The premises were no man is a woman, right? And every mother is a what woman, and the conclusion was is that follows? No man is a mother.

[52:05] So, in what sense was the conclusion in the premises? It wasn't in there; as a part, was it? Not a part, of it, right? Yeah. Just like my children were in Rose and I, right? But not as a part, right? If you cut us open you wouldn't have found a baby in there, right? Okay. So when you think out the conclusion, right? That's this sense right?

[52:39] Now, I don't know about these last two senses, right? If you think out the means to an end, are you thinking out in the eighth? Sense, maybe.

[52:59] The means to get to an end. I'll put that in parenthesis, right? It seems to be a little bit right. To think out the means to an end.

[53:24] I'm not sure that's exactly the sense. but sort of likeness there, right? I'm kind of dumb myself so I kind of, you know, to think out the means to an end. Did you ever think out the means to an end? Mhm. Yeah, we do it a lot of times, don't we? huh?

[53:43] But you're in dinner, right? Think out the means, right? huh? What do you want? You want a Manhattan, right? How do you get a Manhattan, right? You gotta have some whiskey and some... Yeah. So seems something similar today, right?

[54:11] Uh, we mentioned how Charles de Koninck said that every respectable word in philosophy is equivocal by reason, right? Kind of a strong way of putting it, right? And you know, if we didn't have words that were equivocal by reason, we'd have a hard time talking about anything except our immediate surroundings, right? So very important. But

[54:39] to think out the the meanings of a word or the chief meanings of a word, which is that? which of these senses would that be, or does it? come in words, isn't it?

[55:10] That's a very important thing. There's Aristotle who thought out the meanings of the words that we use everywhere, right? And especially that we use in wisdom, right? And what a philosopher did that, right? We saw how in those little passages there, Thomas uses the senses of before, right, in showing that God the Father is not before God the Son, right? He uses the senses of opposites in trying to discover how the persons of the Trinity are distinct, right?

[55:39] It's really profound stuff, right? You know, the end of all knowledge is to contemplate the Trinity, right? But you use these basic senses, thinking out the senses of opposite, thinking out the senses of before, right? Understanding the Trinity. I mentioned I always go back and mention the guy. who. Wrote a doctoral thesis on Karl Marx and uh, and reading his thesis in the Laval Library up there.

[56:08] and of course, one thing he points out is that opposition is central to what Marxist philosophy and the technical name for Marxist philosophy is not Marxist philosophy. uh The author and it goes back to Hegel in a sense, but uh it's dialectical materialism, right? That matter is the source of everything, that things develop by a war of opposites, right? But nowhere does Marx really distinguish the senses of opposite, huh.

[56:44] Yeah. This is very important, right? Huh? Distinguish these things, huh? Somebody might want to say that it's reduced to the fourth sense here, right? Huh? Okay. And it might be because they see a certain likeness, right? When you divide a genus into species, right? Genus is said of each of the species, right? When you divide a word into its meanings, each of those meanings the word can be said, right?

[57:22] But I wonder if that's you know, in some ways it reminds me a bit of to be in place, right? Because in the same place you could put what, anything you want in there, right? You know, if I give you a box, you know, what are you gonna put in it? Depends upon the junk you get around. You know, you might put anything in a box, right?

[57:46] Huh? You know, Might you not do that? If I'm a terrorist. I'd put something in it. You know, you got a bunch of gold bars. You might put the gold bars in there if you don't have a safe and so on, huh? It's like you might put your money in your mattress or something. You know, what are you? Ain't that bad? You know, I remember reading an article.

[58:13] I think it was in the Laval Tribune. Anyway, the young lady philosopher she was quoting Shakespeare. What's in a name? A rose by any other name still smells sweet, right? And he kind of, kind of cleverly said, sometimes there are many things in a name, and that same name is what equivocal, right? Huh? So in a way, the name is like the place where many things are, right?

[58:43] Huh? And there could be many things in what one word, right? Huh? Um, what does it mean to understand the name, right? huh? Well it's to know the meanings of the name, right?

[59:02] But the names kind of are what Kind of arbitrary in a sense, right? I mean the French might call it chien, but we call it dog, or something, right? huh You know. The Greeks might call Sophia, and the Latins call it what? sapientia, we call it wisdom, right? huh? You know, it's kind of you can throw anything under any sound you wanted to, right? Kind of arbitrary, right?

[59:31] It's a little bit like being in place But it's not that with the species and genus, right? The genus signifies in general what each of the species is, right? So animal signifies in general what a dog is, what a cat is, what a horse is, what an elephant, right? They distinguish the various kinds, right? Okay.

[59:58] It's not just any. Genus that we throw a species under right, okay. But it's a genus that it's a name said with one meaning, of many things other in kind signifying what it is, right? Because they're different kinds signifies what they are in general,

[1:00:18] but a name is kind of what. signifies by custom or accident, even by choice, right? Then it seems almost as as accidental what you put in a room, right?

[1:00:36] So one room in the house might be a study for me, Professor Berquist, right? And another child is born and becomes a bedroom for Miss so and so and so and so, right? And uh, you know, there might be something else later on in life, right?

[1:00:54] Right? But it seems to me to think out the meanings of a word is different from all these, right? Now to think out the order of those meaning maybe could be put down here, right? But uh, can be something like that. I was talking with Warren, Murray on the phone today. He said, How do you say that it's like to be in place, right? He wasn't too sure if they go along there or not.

[1:01:28] But it seems to be something different, right?