“Xenophanes might be saying that we have only superficial understanding, and we never get to knowledge of the clear truth.”

Source: Presocratic Philosophy: A Very Short Introduction (2004), Ch. 4 : Reality and appearance: more adventures in metaphysics

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update Dec. 27, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "Xenophanes might be saying that we have only superficial understanding, and we never get to knowledge of the clear trut…" by Catherine Rowett?
Catherine Rowett photo
Catherine Rowett 10
Professor of Philosophy at the University of East Anglia (b… 1956

Related quotes

Ellen G. White photo

“We must not think, "Well, we have all the truth, we understand the main pillars of our faith, and we may rest on this knowledge." The truth is an advancing truth, and we must walk in the increasing light.”

Ellen G. White (1827–1915) American author and founder/leader of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church

The Review and Herald (27 March 1890); also in Counsels for Writers and Editors http://books.google.de/books?id=UEM4uBD04asC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Counsels+to+writers+and+editors&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false (1946), p. 33; also in Evangelism http://books.google.de/books?id=gsy20ga71LEC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Ellen+Gould+Harmon+White+Evangelism&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false (1946), p. 296; also in 1888 - The Ellen G. White 1888 Materials (1987), Ch. 64, p. 547.

Herbert Read photo

“Poetry, we might say, is concerned with the truth of what is, not with what is truth.”

Herbert Read (1893–1968) English anarchist, poet, and critic of literature and art

What is a Poem - Endword - Selected Poems (1926)

Swami Vivekananda photo
Albert Gleizes photo
Mukesh Ambani photo
James Clear photo
Albert Einstein photo
Jean Metzinger photo
Leonhard Euler photo

“The kind of knowledge which is supported only by observations and is not yet proved must be carefully distinguished from the truth; it is gained by induction, as we usually say. Yet we have seen cases in which mere induction led to error.”

Leonhard Euler (1707–1783) Swiss mathematician

Opera Omnia, ser. 1, vol. 2, p. 459 Spcimen de usu observationum in mathesi pura, as quoted by George Pólya, Induction and Analogy in Mathematics Vol. 1, Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning (1954)
Context: It will seem a little paradoxical to ascribe a great importance to observations even in that part of the mathematical sciences which is usually called Pure Mathematics, since the current opinion is that observations are restricted to physical objects that make impression on the senses. As we must refer the numbers to the pure intellect alone, we can hardly understand how observations and quasi-experiments can be of use in investigating the nature of numbers. Yet, in fact, as I shall show here with very good reasons, the properties of the numbers known today have been mostly discovered by observation, and discovered long before their truth has been confirmed by rigid demonstrations. There are many properties of the numbers with which we are well acquainted, but which we are not yet able to prove; only observations have led us to their knowledge. Hence we see that in the theory of numbers, which is still very imperfect, we can place our highest hopes in observations; they will lead us continually to new properties which we shall endeavor to prove afterwards. The kind of knowledge which is supported only by observations and is not yet proved must be carefully distinguished from the truth; it is gained by induction, as we usually say. Yet we have seen cases in which mere induction led to error. Therefore, we should take great care not to accept as true such properties of the numbers which we have discovered by observation and which are supported by induction alone. Indeed, we should use such discovery as an opportunity to investigate more exactly the properties discovered and to prove or disprove them; in both cases we may learn something useful.

Jack McDevitt photo

Related topics