tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1651908162607091292.post7916385177356860118..comments2024-01-05T01:21:21.702-08:00Comments on <center>SPECULUM CRITICUM TRADITIONIS</center>: Many sentences on one sentence on no sentences at all.skholiasthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05410057905377189336noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1651908162607091292.post-938983344378594012020-01-29T21:13:43.695-08:002020-01-29T21:13:43.695-08:00Thank goodness there are still those like you who ...Thank goodness there are still those like you who truly struggle. Most people just think -- struggle, schmuggle. Who has time for that? Shallow folk that they are, they get into philosophy because of the great career track, or the guaranteed salary & benefits package, or (usually) because it's a way to impress girls. Or boys. You drop a little reference to al-Farabi or Avital Ronell, and they're hanging on your. every. word. You know? <br /><br />Seriously: what do you think you know about me, given that I believe in secrecy?skholiasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05410057905377189336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1651908162607091292.post-84827055908675489782020-01-29T14:01:51.968-08:002020-01-29T14:01:51.968-08:00Pushing the authority of Derrida is a shallow. Alw...Pushing the authority of Derrida is a shallow. Always to be ahead of oneself...<br /><br />Pushing the evil lie about Leo Strauss shows the shallowness in particular acts, not having read him. But, appealing to the wicked slanders. <br /><br />Not understanding Wittgenstein correctly because you don't grasp that in ignoring the question of Historicism he doesn't overcome it all. It's clear that someone with the same ipsissimosity or peculiar character, being born in Plato's time, would have been out on another track of research than that prepared by Russel and his time. That Wittgenstein stays with simple observation only conceals the difficulty for the shallow researcher who doesn't know of it. <br /><br />Your infinite praise and defense of Zizek is a best a praise of as Rathenau calls it, the Talmudic intellect, as against the bringing forth of forms. French-Gothic architecture, German music. <br /><br />You don't learn because you don't struggle. But, high hat. <br /><br />Plato's "third man" is not the result of the development of a lifetime of directive thinking, carefully on one subject matter, not some dash out randomly. Again, having no knowledge of Plato, you make a shallow use of this. dixi <br /><br /> <br /><br />epistemeratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05798474757259684172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1651908162607091292.post-66344560813664363932020-01-18T10:40:27.284-08:002020-01-18T10:40:27.284-08:00Kgbd,
Drafting a response got a bit tangled.... a...Kgbd,<br /><br />Drafting a response got a bit tangled.... and long....<br /><a href="https://speculumcriticum.blogspot.com/2020/01/prize-and-consolation.html" rel="nofollow">Here you go</a>.skholiasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05410057905377189336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1651908162607091292.post-76905050986123363102020-01-16T06:59:17.916-08:002020-01-16T06:59:17.916-08:00So I want to both agree and disagree with your cha...So I want to both agree and disagree with your characterization of philosophy here. You suggest: "Philosophy is a bricolage, a Rube Goldberg device that begins with the smallest and most indispensable of things, a mustard seed of one genuine question, culminates with the wallop on the zen master’s stick that cracks the whole thing from top to bottom, and only then – if at all – unfolds into the wabi-sabi realization of the perfect, broken, unfinishable whole." I hear you. This is beautifully said and, I think, quite true. No doubt this experience is one of the things philosophy does quite well and one of the things we love it for. But is it the *main thing* philosophy does? Is it *why* we engage in philosophical inquiry? I'll leave aside the first, more general question and answer the personal one for myself. No. I love this experience of "the perfect, broken unfinishable whole" emerging into view out of the inevitable (partial) failure of my inquiries. But it is the equally partial successes that keep me going. I continue the inquiries because I really want to know whether nature is mechanical or teleological, whether the best regime is democratic or aristocratic, how it is possible to know what we do not know. I want answers! Yes, every answer turns out to be another question. But that doesn't mean it's not also an answer. Each day, I am trying to run farther and higher into the hills above my home. My goals are concrete. I want to get there -- to the top of *that* hill. Just because, from the top of that hill, it turns out I can always discover another, larger and more enticing one, doesn't take away from the accomplishment of surmounting the first. What you describe seems to be to be like the runner's endorphin rush, which gives us that beautiful and redemptive sense of connection to the ineffable, which makes even our failures and weaknesses look noble. A lovely compensation prize -- and probably necessary for weak and ignorant beings like us. But I still want to get to the top of that next fucking hill.<br />kawingbirdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12504361746566297109noreply@blogger.com