Epictetus, Discourses 1.17.1

Chapter 17: That the processes of logic are necessary.

 

Since it is reason which makes all other things articulate and complete, and reason itself must be analyzed and made articulate, what is it that shall effect this? 

 

Plainly, reason itself or something else. 

 

That something else either is reason or it will be something superior to reason, which is impossible. 

 

If it is reason, who again will analyze that reason? For if it analyses itself, so can the reason with which we started. 

 

If we are going to call in something else, the process will be endless and unceasing. 

—from Epictetus, Discourses 1.17 

 

I constantly hear people insisting that we must be logical and reasonable, and yet I very rarely come across anyone willing or able to specifically explain what this means. 

 

Could you please define this method for me? How am I to learn it? When will I know if I am practicing it correctly? There may be some nervous fidgeting, and you will hear much obfuscation, and perhaps the most confident fellow in the room will say that you are only being reasonable when you have finally come to agree with his own point of view. 

 

Let us not blame this on the ignorance of the unwashed masses, because my run in the refined atmosphere of academia has shown me how many intellectuals are just as clueless. We look down our noses at the handful of logicians working on some technical problem in the corner, while we ourselves are incapable of distinguishing between a valid and a sound argument. 

 

Should we be surprised, when the average high school or college student will take classes on a wide range of topics, even as he will have no practice at all, whether formal or informal, in the art of dialectic? 

 

So I struggle to avoid falling into the bickering and grandstanding by carefully laying out my terms, propositions, and syllogisms, though by the time I have barely managed this, the fiery debate has usually moved on to the next trending topic. 

 

I know how frustrating it can be to get caught up in dizzying abstractions, but the fact remains that the power of reason is the ultimate measure by which we assign all meaning and value in our lives. Without understanding, there can be no purpose, and without the direction of purpose, every action will be in vain. 

 

How might I assure that my reason is operating smoothly? Can it rely upon its own awareness to test its accuracy, or must it rely upon some other source? 

 

It would seem contradictory if a capacity for reflection and judgment could not consider itself with such reflection and judgment, or if consciousness, which is able to contain within itself the identity of things, is somehow hindered from discerning the true from the false about those very things. 

 

In other words, if a mind cannot be its own master, then a different mind will not suffice to perform the task in its place. If thought needs to keep looking further and further beyond its limits to establish the first principles of thought, that can only result in an infinite regress, an unending passing of the buck. 

 

I will not gain a harvest of apples by planting cabbages, and I will not perfect my intellect by doing anything other than thoroughly, carefully, and consistently exercising my capacity to apprehend, to judge, and to demonstrate. 

—Reflection written in 1/2001