Lecture
1: That there is no need of giving many proofs for one problem.
Once when discussion turned upon
proofs or demonstrations, such as beginners must learn from their teachers of
philosophy in gaining a mastery of whatever they are studying, Musonius said
that there was no sense in seeking many proofs for each point, but rather
cogent and lucid ones.
Thus just as the physician who
prescribes many drugs for his patients deserves less praise than the one who
succeeds in helping them with a few, so the philosopher who teaches his pupils
with the use of many proofs is less effective than the one who leads them to
the desired goal with few.
And the pupil too, the quicker
his intelligence, the fewer proofs he will require, and the sooner he will
assent to the conclusion of the argument in question, provided it be sound. But
those who require proofs at every point, even where the matter is perfectly
clear, or demand to have demonstrated at length things that could be explained
briefly are completely inept and dull-witted.
I spent
most of my time in academia studying the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas,
hardly a popular figure these days, unless you are a medievalist or traditional
Catholic. So my ears perked up when I overheard a student in the hallway loudly
proclaiming, “Aquinas is the best philosopher ever, and I’ll tell you why!”
This was going to be interesting.
“See,
other philosophers may have one, or maybe two, proofs for the existence of God,
but Aquinas has five!”
I didn’t
know if I should laugh or cry. I will always insist that Aquinas is one the
greatest minds there ever was, but that is hardly the reason. More isn’t
better, better is better. Quantity never trumps quality. Give me clarity and
simplicity first and foremost, and let me not be tempted to think that verbosity
and complexity are somehow praiseworthy in themselves.
I
immediately think of Ockham’s Razor. Principles should not be multiplied beyond
necessity, or, in more common terms, keep it simple, and don’t make it more
confusing than it has to be. You will recognize a sharp mind when it gets
straight to the point, a dull mind when it gets caught up in complications and
footnotes.
Apparently
doctors haven’t changed that much, because I will still find myself leaving the
specialist’s office with twenty prescriptions, all with long names and big
price tags, and not a one seems to make me feel any better. Then I meet the old
GP who tells me to go for a long walk every day, and suddenly the spring is
back in my step.
I did
not need to give my wife twenty different reasons for why she should marry me,
complete with a PowerPoint presentation and a projection of my future earning
power. “I love you” was more than sufficient.
Hire
just as many men as are actually needed to do the job, not as many men as can
possibly be paid to supervise, do more paperwork, and criticize everyone else’s
productivity. Efficiency and bureaucracy stand in sharp contrast to one
another.
The
truth of the matter is really what comes first, and everything else comes a
distant second. More or less are only relevant when measured in the service of
true or false, of right or wrong. Ask only enough for what is required.
As a
student I would grit my teeth in frustration when my peers would talk on and
on, just to hear themselves talking. As a teacher, I became a bit more patient,
and I would try to gently steer the conversation back on track, but I still
sigh when I think of all the wasted hours, throwing around abstract
complexities, just because they made us feel more important.
They
weren’t revealing how profound we were; they were hiding how confused we were.
Written in 2/1999
No comments:
Post a Comment