Tag Archives: Walter Watson

The Archic Philosophers

May 3, 2013 Martin K. Jones 1 Comment

In a word, the Sophist begins from man, the Democritean from matter, the Platonist from form, and the Aristotelian from functioning.

— From The Architectonics of Meaning, by Walter Watson

Inspired by philosopher Richard McKeon, I believe that philosophy as a whole is encompassed by four main philosophical stances, exemplified by four ancient philosophers: the Sophists (as a group), Democritus, Plato, and Aristotle. Their four systems of thought lay out principal philosophical directions, much like the compass directions east, south, north, and west lay out a complete set of primary directions.

Of course the compass directions can be subdivided into north-east, or south-south-west, and so on, and similarly each of these philosophical systems can be divided into four parts. This division into a four-by-four matrix is called the Archic Matrix and was written about at length in the separate but complementary works of Walter Watson and David Dilworth.

Watson and Dilworth described the four main philosophical directions to be perspective, reality, method, and principle: perspective for the Sophists, reality for Democritus, method for Plato, and principle for Aristotle. I have written about these philosophical perspectives previously in several ways.

Thus philosophy as a practice goes around and around and revisits the same ideas over and over. Perhaps McKeon thought his philosophical system followed in the footsteps of Aristotle, and probably Watson and Dilworth had a similar view.

Likewise, I believe that my fourfold of Structure-Function represents these four philosophical directions in the following way: Action(s) for the Sophists, Part(s) for Democritus, Structure for Plato, and Function for Aristotle.

[*6.108]
<>

architectonics, epistemology, fourfolds, hermeneutics, ontology, Philosophy

Walter Watson and David Dilworth’s Archic Matrix

December 2, 2011 Martin K. Jones 11 Comments

Throughout the history of philosophy, there have been many conflicting stances both towards claiming what exists (ontology), and how we can know our claims are valid (epistemology). There are the oppositions between idealism and realism, between rationalism and empiricism, between thinking all is change and all is changeless, between all is many and all is one, and so on. One approach to overcome these oppositions is to combine them to form their Hegelian synthesis. Another is to deconstruct them à la Derrida. Another pluralistic approach is to consider that there is a germ of truth on each side of the conflicting stance, an aspect of reality for which that stance is valid. Some might think that pluralism is the same as relativism, but it is not. Relativism and pluralism form yet another philosophical opposition like others mentioned above.

Regardless of the validity of pluralism, it can be very useful to analyze what philosophical stances are possible and how they relate to one another. The philosopher Richard McKeon created a rich schema for philosophical semantics that deserves greater recognition. This schema was both simplified and elaborated on by Walter Watson and David Dilworth in their books about the Archic Matrix. There are four main aspects, all exemplified by ancient philosophers: the Sophists, Democritus, Plato, and Aristotle. Everything else is a combination of these original aspects, or essentially a rehashing of them. The main aspects are perspective from the Sophists, reality from Democritus, method from Plato, and principle from Aristotle. These partition “what is”, however it is conceived, into four aspects, each of which can be interpreted in four different ways.

Considering Whitehead’s Criteria, note that perspective has consistency, method has coherency, reality has applicability, and principle has adequacy.

Archic Matrix: Principles

August 12, 2011 Martin K. Jones 3 Comments

Creative	cause functioning by virtue of (indeterminate) potentiality	transcend what is given, functioning caused is without limit	different for different things, indeterminate in kind of functioning caused
Elemental	cause functioning by virtue of (determinate) potentiality	immanent in what is given, from which the functioning emerges	same for all things, all things are the same in their being
Comprehensive	cause functioning by virtue of actuality (of totality)	transcend what is given, functioning of all things transcends any given thing	same for all things, all things are differentiated parts of same whole
Reflexive	cause functioning by virtue of actuality (of functionality)	immanent in what is given, as the functioning itself	different for different things, determinate in kind of functioning caused

Since the Archic Matrix can be thought of as the union of four separate fourfolds, each of the fourfolds of perspective, reality, method, principle can be considered on its own. Here is the fourfold of principles consisting of creative, elemental, comprehensive, and reflexive principles. The content of the table and the bottom figure is derived from Walter Watson’s Architectonics of Meaning.

[*6.146-*6.148]

architectonics, fourfolds, Philosophy

Archic Matrix: Methods

August 12, 2011 Martin K. Jones 4 Comments

Agonistic	parts are primary, producing whole through endeavors	two voices are tested against each other to organize whole	close off intermediate wholes because of external forces
Logistic	parts are primary, producing whole while remaining same	one voice beginning from determinate towards determinate whole	extend towards ultimates (least parts)
Dialectic	whole determines parts directly	two voices are united with each other to organize whole	extend towards ultimates (all-inclusive whole)
Problematic	whole determines parts reciprocally	one voice beginning from indeterminate towards determinate whole	close off intermediate wholes because of own internal unity

Since the Archic Matrix can be thought of as the union of four separate fourfolds, each of the fourfolds of perspective, reality, method, principle can be considered on its own. Here is the fourfold of methods consisting of agonistic, logistic, dialectic, and problematic methods. The content of the table and the bottom figure is derived from Walter Watson’s Architectonics of Meaning.

[*6.146-*6.148]

architectonics, fourfolds, Philosophy

Archic Matrix: Realities

August 11, 2011 Martin K. Jones 5 Comments

Existential	individual, infinite	separate changing (real) from unchanging	reality found in appearances (themselves)
Substrative	individual, infinite individuations of common substratum	persists through change (substratum)	reality lies behind appearances (underlying)
Noumenal	general, one ideal individual apart from many	separate changing from unchanging (real)	reality lies behind appearances (transcending)
Essential	general, many individuals themselves	persists through change (essence)	reality found in appearances (that which appears)

Since the Archic Matrix can be thought of as the union of four separate fourfolds, each of the fourfolds of perspective, reality, method, principle can be considered on its own. Here is the fourfold of realities consisting of existential, substrative, noumenal, and essential realities. The content of the table and the bottom figure is derived from Walter Watson’s Architectonics of Meaning.

[*6.146-*6.148]

architectonics, fourfolds, Philosophy

Archic Matrix: Perspectives

August 11, 2011 Martin K. Jones 4 Comments

Personal	distinction between (primary) subject and object	personal, merely but infinite in number	constitutive of (individual) content
Objective	distinction between subject and (primary) object	impersonal, subjectivity excluded	non-constitutive, subordinate to content
Diaphanic	unity between subject and object (to be obtained)	personal, subordinated to higher and absolute perspectives	non-constitutive, subordinate to superior views
Disciplinary	unity between subject and object (initial condition)	impersonal, subjectivity universalized	constitutive of (universal) content

Since the Archic Matrix can be thought of as the union of four separate fourfolds, each of the fourfolds of perspective, reality, method, principle can be considered on its own. Here is the fourfold of perspectives consisting of personal, objective, diaphanic, and disciplinary perspectives. The content of the table and the bottom figure is derived from Walter Watson’s Architectonics of Meaning.