Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Pamphilus Has the Last Word
Pamphilus concludes at the end of the Dialogues, "Philo's principles are more probable than Demea's, but those of Cleanthes approach still nearer to the truth" (89). What are we to make of this observation? Is this supposed to be the judgment of Hume? Is this supposed to be ironic in some way? Does this statement tell us anything about the arguments -- or more about Pamphilus?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It is interesting that hume wrote a character into his dialogues simply to render judgement upon the arguments presented. It seems to suggest that hume himself wants to present the "winning" (therefore his own view) in both a glorifying light and in supposed "non-partisan" view. The possibility exists that Hume is infact that insecure about his beliefs. Or Pamphilus serves not as a judgement or verification of hume but rather an attempt to refresh the readers experience. Perhaps Pamphilus is supposed to take the deeprooted beliefs of the reader and shake them loose a bit. Maybe to change, or maybe simply to reinforce them. It is very interesting that Pamphilus seems to contradict himself. At the beggining of the dialogues, Pamphilus states that Philo's brand of reasoning is inferior, nay unweildly in comparison with those of cleanthes and demea. Yet in the end, Philo comes in a close second to Cleanthes, with demea firmly in the back.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, i think Pamphilus is there to make us think, because thats something any philosopher would want.
Consensus seems to point towards irony, and I'm going with consensus. The dialogues were published posthumously, and the first editions didn't even mention Hume....Pamphilus likely serves to reaffirm superficially Christian ideologies because Hume can't bring himself do it; he can't support a philosophy he doesn't believe in, and he's not particularly interested in offending the Church. So, he brings in Pamphilus to save himself.
ReplyDelete