0
   

authenticity at school

 
 
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2010 04:04 pm
I thought I would post this, seeing as this quote is very memorable.

Quote:
Immediately we have comprehended the wisdom of a philosopher, we go through the streets with a feeling as if we had been recreated and had become great men; for we encounter only those who are ignorant of this wisdom, and have therefore to deliver new and unknown verdicts concerning everything. Because we now recognize a law-book we think we must also comport ourselves as judges. - Nietzsche (Human, All too Human)


I find this important to recognize, and especially when looking back at the previous philosophers in history who many like to say were wrong all the time, or missed the point (etc.)

Some judge past philosophers arrogantly. Somehow it is felt that Locke, or Descartes, or Bentham were missing something, something we deem now to be obvious. Then, likewise, as judges arrogance asserts itself. It is all of a sudden unforgivable to venerate a philosopher after an analysis of his philosophy.

How can philosophy be a part of one's life today if we cannot learn to appreciate ideas beyond their truth? A kind of propriety has emerged in the intellectual culture that suddenly, perhaps because there are those with nothing to say and offer themselves, an idea's moral and intellectual worth is reflected solely upon its truth and validity. And then one is lead to the question of these people's appreciation of the cultures in history.

What if today's culture is simply a denial of all former culture, or rather, the denial of the illusion needed to create a unity that is of a culture. We cannot have culture because we have become too proper not to let truth and validity become of primary importance. I do not think this is right but there is something more to be said of all this, that we have forgotten how to speak from our hearts, so we instead attack from the truth.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,840 • Replies: 3
No top replies

 
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2010 04:13 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Holiday20310401;174368 wrote:


What if today's culture is simply a denial of all former culture, or rather, the denial of the illusion needed to create a unity that is of a culture. We cannot have culture because we have become too proper not to let truth and validity become of primary importance. I do not think this is right but there is something more to be said of all this, that we have forgotten how to speak from our hearts, so we instead attack from the truth.



We are in a sort of denial of past culture.
1) Past culture is like memory. The conflation of the past affects us but we do not recognize it as history because we only experience the residual effects. It is like memory because our past experience directly affects everything in our present but we are not cognizant of it. It is an amorphous memory blob.

2) When we see things from the present we have a sense of rebellion against the past, like you wrote above. We consider ourselves the pinnacle of progress, and things that are now are obviously better than things that were then because we are in the now and we were not in the then. A novel culture never really manifests, just an evolutionary descendant of previous ones.
0 Replies
 
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2010 04:33 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Holiday20310401;174368 wrote:
I thought I would post this, seeing as this quote is very memorable.



I'm not sure where you were going with the last two paragraphs...but I liked the quote. The human tendency towards pomposity. There was a thread here recently where we were asked to summarize the proper form of government...in a few bullet points! But that is staggeringly difficult task.

Quote:
I find this important to recognize, and especially when looking back at the previous philosophers in history who many like to say were wrong all the time, or missed the point (etc.)

Some judge past philosophers arrogantly. Somehow it is felt that Locke, or Descartes, or Bentham were missing something, something we deem now to be obvious. Then, likewise, as judges arrogance asserts itself. It is all of a sudden unforgivable to venerate a philosopher after an analysis of his philosophy.
I think it is very true that it easy to look back and say "right to free speech? Duh!" and much harder to formulate that kind of idea in the first place. This can lead to previous philosophers being unfairly disparaged (although it is also true that people will speak highly of philosophers just because they are famous, whether they deserve it or not).
0 Replies
 
jack phil
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2010 08:20 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Holiday20310401;174368 wrote:
I thought I would post this, seeing as this quote is very memorable.



I find this important to recognize, and especially when looking back at the previous philosophers in history who many like to say were wrong all the time, or missed the point (etc.)

Some judge past philosophers arrogantly. Somehow it is felt that Locke, or Descartes, or Bentham were missing something, something we deem now to be obvious. Then, likewise, as judges arrogance asserts itself. It is all of a sudden unforgivable to venerate a philosopher after an analysis of his philosophy.

How can philosophy be a part of one's life today if we cannot learn to appreciate ideas beyond their truth? A kind of propriety has emerged in the intellectual culture that suddenly, perhaps because there are those with nothing to say and offer themselves, an idea's moral and intellectual worth is reflected solely upon its truth and validity. And then one is lead to the question of these people's appreciation of the cultures in history.

What if today's culture is simply a denial of all former culture, or rather, the denial of the illusion needed to create a unity that is of a culture. We cannot have culture because we have become too proper not to let truth and validity become of primary importance. I do not think this is right but there is something more to be said of all this, that we have forgotten how to speak from our hearts, so we instead attack from the truth.


Their arrogance lead them to be published; ours is far easier, so long as we seek not to be published.

I mean, why are there not thousands of Gospels rather than a few? Considering how many followers of Christianity there are...

There are, however, many philosophical treatise.

"What can be said at all can be said clearly, and wereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent" LW
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Your Quote of the Day - Discussion by edgarblythe
Poo-tee-weet? - Question by boomerang
can anyone help me with this quote - Question by ritchielmk
Quotes...not exactly correct. - Question by Frank Apisa
Post your favorite tv shows Quotes? - Question by makwarne01
looking for a peace offering quotes - Question by aycelsanorjo
Looking for a particular quote... - Discussion by LocalHero
 
  1. Forums
  2. » authenticity at school
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/21/2024 at 03:59:06