Talk:Thomas Hill Green

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, now in the public domain.
This article may be too technical for a general audience.
Please help improve this article by providing more context and better explanations of technical details to make it more accessible, without removing technical details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Socrates
Philosophy Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

I've added the technical and confusing tags to this article. The whole style to me is a problem. It may be appropriate for a degree level essay but not for a general encyclopedia. e.g.

By reducing the human mind to a series of unrelated atomic sensations, this teaching destroyed the possibility of knowledge, and further, by representing man as a "being who is simply the result of natural forces," it made conduct, or any theory of conduct, unmeaning; for life in any human, intelligible sense implies a personal self which (1) knows what to do, (2) has power to do it.

First of all the sentance is horribly long. Then the following terms are completely unclear to someone without a background in philosphy:

  • atomic sensations - what have Oxygen, Nitrogen etc got to do with it?
  • theory of conduct

I hope these comments are taken in the spirit in which they are intended - I am sure this guy is an important philospher but at present it doesn't communicate that fact well to a non-specialist.--NHSavage 12:30, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

In regard to atomic sensations, the word "atomic" has nothing to do with the useful fiction that physicists meant when they appropriated that word. It means the simplest, most basic sensation that results from contact between one of the body's sense organs with one object that is external to that body. The sensation is atomic in that it cannot be analyzed, broken down, or separated into more simple, basic sensations. Atomic = simple, or not compound.Lestrade 22:03, 18 February 2006 (UTC)Lestrade