dmb says:
I'm impressed with your reply, Ron. It looks like real thought and work went 
into the making of it. Thanks for that. Seriously.
More to say, but later on.
 





> Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:43:44 -0700
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [MD] The Art of Philosophy
> 
> 
> 
> dmb says:
> Well, basically we're talking about the long-term effects of the Platonic 
> legacy and he is, along with Socrates and Aristotle, the founder of Western 
> philosophy. Very roughly speaking, we're talking about what happened to the 
> Sophists back in ancient Greece and it's kinda like Socrates built them a 
> casket, Plato put them in it and Aristotle nailed it shut.
> 
> "Rhetoric is an art, Aristotle began, because it can be reduced to a rational 
> system of order. That just left Phaedrus aghast. Stopped. He’d been prepared 
> to decode messages of great subtlety, systems of great complexity in order to 
> understand the deeper inner meaning of Aristotle, claimed by many to be the 
> greatest philosopher of all time. And then to get hit, right off, straight in 
> the face, with an asshole statement like that! It really shook him."
> 
> "Between the lines Phædrus read no doubts, no sense of awe, only the eternal 
> smugness of the professional academician. Did Aristotle really think his 
> students would be better rhetoricians for having learned all these endless 
> names and relationships? And if not, did he really think he was teaching 
> rhetoric? Phædrus thought that he really did. There was nothing in his style 
> to indicate that Aristotle was ever one to doubt Aristotle. Phædrus saw 
> Aristotle astremendously satisfied with this neat little stunt of naming and 
> classifying everything. His world began and ended withthis stunt. The reason 
> why, if he were not more than two thousand years dead, he would have gladly 
> rubbed him out isthat he saw him as a PROTOTYPE for the many millions of 
> self-satisfied and truly ignorant teachers throughout history who have smugly 
> and callously killed the creative spirit of their students with this dumb 
> ritual of analysis, this blind, rote, eternal naming of things.
>  Walk into any of a hundred thousand classrooms today and hear the teachers 
> divide and subdivide and interrelate and establish "principles" and study 
> "methods" and what you will hear is the ghost of Aristotle speaking down 
> through the centuries...the desiccating lifeless voice of dualistic reason."
> 
> [Ron replies:]
> Those who are to communicate with one another by way of arguement, that is, 
> in order to persuade one
> another, must have some common understanding. Every word must therefore be 
> intelligible. Art to Aristotle
> is a discipline, "Art is born when out of the many bits of information 
> derived from experience there emerges
> a grasp of those similarities in view of which they are unified whole." 
> Rhetoric is an art, but as any art, a discipline must be mastered first, as 
> the skillfull mechanic. Then when those
> basic rules of meaning have become second nature, one may create with freedom 
> and skill, which is where
> Pirsig ultimately ends up within his own metaphysics.
> I think if one looks closly at Aristotle, it becomes increasingly difficult 
> to discern exactly where he 
> actually crushes or kills creativity, but he does call for a development of 
> skill and craftsmanship as
> a proper foundation for the creative spirit.
> The ritual was passed on and lost it's original meaning. What the crime 
> REALLY is, is the blind following
> of ritual without understanding of the principles involved. It's easy to 
> point to one particular person and blame
> all the stupidity of blind conformity of western civilization on them but 
> it's much more difficult to inquire as to
> how and why it happened. It does make for good reading and Pirsig used it 
> skillfully but in the end he makes
> the same call for precision consistancy and clarity in meaning and when we 
> look back at the beginning of 
> his journey where he makes those comments quoted above we really see the 
> intensity and the drive to get
> to the bottom of the problem. One mans journey into the understanding of the 
> origins of western rationality
> to which he then expands apon, "to untangle a knot one must first see it".
>  
> Thnx Dave
> ..
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
                                          
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html

Reply via email to