The Three Filters (Socrates)

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by Perpetual Burn, Sep 22, 2007.


    So, Socrates' Three Filters are...

    1. Is it True?
    2. Is it Good?
    3. Is it Useful?

    What do you guys think about the Three Filters?

    I've got two major gripes. But I think I like 'em.
  2. I think its good for the most part. The truth part is good in theory. Sometimes Ive been in a situation where the info needed to be passed on so quickly that I did not have the time to check into it. For example, if someone calls me and tells me your house is being raided by the DEA Im not going to your house to check first, Im calling you to let you know. Also the is it good part is only good in theory. Sometimes people need to know something bad. You need to know if your friend is a piece of crap because it is useful.

    I would rearrange the order of the filters. If its very useful you should give some leeway on the other two filters until you have the time to check into it.

    People should think about this before they spread rumors. It is perfect for that application, based on the dialogue I assume that is what it was meant for.
  3. I think you only need to pass one filter to tell the person what you want to say.
  4. That is the way Socrates viewed it aswell. Which brings me to the smaller of my gripes... if I were to apply these filters in my life, I'd make sure people are passing at least two of them before allowing that information to be allowed. Especially given the context of "passing judgment" like shasta alluded to. Now, if something passes all three filters, it would have to be considered intellectually honest discussion (if not simply because it is not intellectually dishonest.)

    But, I've still got another gripe...

    remember, this is Socrates, "The Great Philosopher."
  5. How can we be sure what Socrates is saying is true?

    Shit, total mindfuck. I'm blizted.
  6. The problem with the three filters test is that it is really only one filter, and that's a human brain...

    not to mention 'truth' 'goodness' and 'usefulness' are all abstract concepts...
  7. Well if some information is useful and good, but you don't know its true, well I would need to verify it so it wouldn't be all that useful. And if its good and true, but useless, well I would only want to hear it if I weren't busy. If it were true and useful, but bad I would want it, but would not want to hear it at say a party. So I would only want it in any situation if it passed all three. In most situations at two and at spefic situations at one, like in shastas example.
  8. Truth is what has been scientifically proven.
    Usefulness is a measure of how much progress something may bring about.
  9. You know...that statement can't be scientifically proven...

    and what is progess without an understanding of history?
  10. I found this statement to be true many times. Often times in corporations you must pit your loyalties to one group, against another; so it is very important that when somebody tells you something you are able to discern the three filters.

    This discernment is often a skill that a person has honed over a lifetime... However these filters are a good start.
  11. I liked it, definitely a mental powerhouse- that guy :D
  12. i have my own filters.
  13. Thank you. That's what I realized which is why I do not really like the Filters at all (or at least would never use them.)

    It simply teaches moral code and how to think like Socrates... and it ultimately limits how you perceive information and your ability to rationalize and entertain all thoughts based on said information.

    I don't imagine Socrates applied them other than as a method to weed-out people he did not consider up to his mental standard rather than evaluating their ideas one at a time with no cognitive bias.

    I reason this is an example of why Diogenes thought Socrates was a "quack."

Share This Page