What we’re about
We're a community that practices and discusses philosophy, being free and open to all levels and backgrounds. We offer seminars, a variety of discussion formats, and the occasional lecture / guest speaker.
Many meetings will have fewer RSVPs than people who actually attend. This is because overtime people stop making use of Meetup.com and instead communicate with their groups via Discord, Slack, Zoom, E-mail, or similar You can think of the list of events hosted on this Meetup as advertisements for groups seeking new participants.
Our philosophy offerings are organized and facilitated by volunteers. If you have a philosophy offering - or an offering that compliments the study of philosophy, such as in literature, the sciences, and so on - that you'd like to advertise through this Meetup, please contact the organizer. We're grateful to those who want to enrich Portland with study and discussion!
Participants must speak, write, and act in a considerate, professional, and respectful manner, and be prepared for the meetings that they attend, having reviewed the materials to the degree necessary to participate. If you haven't reviewed the materials but still wish to attend an event, please consult the event facilitator regarding the best manner for you to be present.
We look forward to studying philosophy together!
Upcoming events (4+)
See all- Aristotle's On Interpretation - Live-Reading--European StyleLink visible for attendees
September 16 - We continue reading chapter 14, the last chapter of On Interpretation. It is roughly about knowing the knowable through belief. Up until now, Aristotle has been focusing on the relationship between the knowing and the things that are known. Now, in the final chapter, he turns his attention toward the relationship between the knowing and the beliefs we craft so as to lasso-grasp the things that are known. Presently, the issue is, which belief is more opposite to the belief "A is B"; is it "A isn't B" or is it "A is C" (in which B and C are contrary concepts)? The bookmark is set at Bekker line 23b33.
.
George will read and invite us to interpret the new section.
.
The chapter review most relevant to where we are is chapter 6. Here is my review of it. https://mega.nz/file/anJBwDZZ#MKELep93ey2WkvPXkMx42dbpPL5Exa0lAs1DnYLqGek
.
Join the meeting, keep pen and notepad at the ready, and participate.
.
------
.
Organon means "instrument," as in, instrument for thought and speech. The term was given by ancient commentators to a group of Aristotle's treatises comprising his logical works.Organon
|-- Categories ---- 2023.02.28
|-- On Interpretation ---- 2023.12.12
|-- Topics ---- 2025.??
|-- On Sophistical Refutations
|-- Rhetoric*
|-- Prior Analytics
|-- Posterior Analytics(* Robin Smith, author of SEP's 2022 entry "Aristotle's Logic," argues that Rhetoric should be part of the Organon.)
Whenever we do any human thing, we can either do it well or do it poorly. With instruments, we can do things either better, faster, and more; or worse, slower, and less. That is, with instruments they either augment or diminish our doings.
Do thinking and speaking (and writing and listening) require instruments? Yes. We do need physical instruments like microphones, megaphones, pens, papers, computers. But we also need mental instruments: grammar, vocabulary words, evidence-gathering techniques, big-picture integration methods, persuasion strategies. Thinking while sitting meditatively all day in a lotus position doesn't require much instrumentation of any kind, but thinking and speaking well in the sense of project planning, problem-solving, negotiating, arguing, deliberating--that is, the active doings in the world (whether romantic, social, commercial, or political)--do require well-honed mental instruments. That's the Organon in a nutshell.
Are you an up-and-coming human being, a doer, go-getter, achiever, or at least you're choosing to become one? You need to wield the Organon.
Join us.
- Rationalism Befalling Objectivist Stance about Trump - A Case StudyLink visible for attendees
Methods for comprehending the world can be classified generally into
- (1) inferring from universal principles--rationalism,
- (2) gathering reports from sense-data--empiricism, or
- (3) inducing ever-higher generalizations from perception--objectivism.
This classification on methodology contextualizes the epistemology of Objectivism, the philosophy as outlined by 20th-century novelist-philosopher Ayn Rand.
Yet intellectual leaders of organized Objectivism--i.e., those institutions setup after her death, such as the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI)--don't practice what they preach in the sphere of politics.
We argue that, specifically, on the question of whether or not to endorse the Trump 45/47 administrations, Objectivists of organized Objectivism fall back on the method of rationalism to answer the political question.
Meeting Outline:
- Reviewing Objectivism as Ayn Rand's philosophy
- Reviewing the MDI methodological hypothesis: misintegration, disintegration, and integration, mapping them to rationalism, empiricism, and objectivism
- Presenting organized Objectivism's position about the current federal administration and the leaders' reasoning
- Presenting the facts about the administration
- On why the leadership's position is a case of rationalism
- Replying to objections and counterarguments against our view
- Q & A
Speakers' Briefs:
- Sherwin Newman: Objectivist and intellectual activist with a mission to advance truth in the American culture war; addressing the current state of the Objectivist community; writing actively on Facebook, Substack, and Instagram. Sherwin is a graduate from the University of South Africa and currently lives in New Hampshire.
- Ed Mazlish: Objectivist since 1993 and podcaster of late, Ed has been a practicing attorney for 30 years, with a practice that has primarily focused on business and constitutional litigation. You can connect with him on Facebook.
Join in for a discussion on applied philosophy.
----
Image source: WSJ video-image
