tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post2576970673538647060..comments2024-03-27T16:48:21.039-05:00Comments on Wuthering <br>Expectations: Plato's Symposium - philosophy as realist fiction - pick up something to tickle your nose with, and sneezeAmateur Reader (Tom)http://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-21740254870285800202022-10-14T09:33:38.050-05:002022-10-14T09:33:38.050-05:00"much better," that is promising. It su..."much better," that is promising. It sure sounds good.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-13897645528192729942022-10-13T08:17:50.656-05:002022-10-13T08:17:50.656-05:00Xenophon's Symposium is, to my mind, a much be...Xenophon's Symposium is, to my mind, a much better read than Plato's--among other things, the symposiasts stage a beauty contest of sorts, Socrates memorably compares himself (or is compared?) to a pimp, and there are dancers and flute girls to round out the evening. More dialogue than speechifying, though sadly no Alcibiades. Socrates also shows up with a passel of followers/disciples/hangers-on, which creates a different dynamic than the group in Plato's Symposium. I find Xenophon's Socrates a more congenial and interesting character than Plato's, especially in the former's Memorabilia, a collection of sketches of Socrates' life. His philosophy is uniquely down-to-earth in a very different style than most of Plato.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-29594963002948970772022-10-07T18:51:52.764-05:002022-10-07T18:51:52.764-05:00I've never read any Xenophon, but hope to read...I've never read any Xenophon, but hope to read some of his Socratic pieces if I follow through on this philosophy idea.<br /><br />I would love to know to what extent the crazy story of Aristophanes belongs to the playwright, retold over the decades because it was so wild, or to Plato-as-Aristophanes, inventing freely.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-47482061915934087862022-10-07T12:43:42.529-05:002022-10-07T12:43:42.529-05:00This was funnier than anything else by Plato I'...This was funnier than anything else by Plato I've read. The Aristophanes segment is certainly the best bit in it. Socrates' speech was surprisingly poorly-reasoned, and I was struck overall with the way the speakers all mistake desire for love, and "the good" for "what's best for me." The whole thing reminded me again of how alien the ancient Athenians were, and why I find them hard to take.<br /><br />It was interesting to see that the idea of multiple narrators and linked stories is pretty old, much older than Chaucer, say. Has anyone read Xenophon's <i>Symposium</i>? The translator of my copy of Plato mentions it in passing.scott g.f.baileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05726743149139510832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-82467483158991256112022-10-04T16:48:06.631-05:002022-10-04T16:48:06.631-05:00Logic wasn't a completely other field. It was ...Logic wasn't a completely other field. It was crucial to some philosophers, like Wittgenstein and Russell, and influenced others less (Nietzsche, for example). I appreciate it, but, as I said, not when it gets too prolix. <br /><br />Thanks for the link to your earlier posts. I'll have to read Rée. If you're looking for more suggestions (a big if), I recommend Richard Popkin's "History of Skepticism," a good concise account of the development and uses of that particular idea.<br /><br />The sophists not only circulated, but enjoyed quibbles and paradoxes for their own sake. I think Abbott and Costello's proof that 7 x 13 = 28 would have been a hit in Athens.<br /><br />(Doug Skinner, pseudonymously anonymous)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-40317709099630071932022-10-03T13:06:10.481-05:002022-10-03T13:06:10.481-05:00Yes, the logicians, a whole other field.
An empir...Yes, the logicians, a whole other field.<br /><br />An empiricist, I define "philosophy" as "what philosophers do," some of which is quite distinct from what literary practitioners do. I thought Jonathan Rée’s <i>Witcraft</i> (my shallow survey of it <a href="https://wutheringexpectations.blogspot.com/2020/08/jonathan-rees-witcraft-invention-of.html" rel="nofollow">begins here</a>), a book with what I take as a clearly literary approach to philosophy, was brilliant, but of course it helped that I could understand it. My wife points me to John Gray's <a href="https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2021/03/25/philosophy-an-art-jonathan-ree-witcraft/</a" rel="nofollow"> NYRB review which insists that whatever <i>Witcraft</i> is it is <i>definitely not</i> philosophy.<br /><br />I agree about Abbott and Costello. Some of those guys move in circles.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-73096880665802506922022-10-03T07:35:46.051-05:002022-10-03T07:35:46.051-05:00I'm sure there are more or less literary appro...I'm sure there are more or less literary approaches, but I don't know what they are. For one thing, I don't know how to define "literature" and "philosophy." "Something someone wrote"? "Something someone wrote and called philosophy"? (The inability to define terms is probably a side effect of reading philosophy.) Although it's a basic premise of literature that the subject matter is less important than what one does with it, I have to admit that some subjects engage me more. I find Plato more readable when he discusses love than laws, and Epicurus more readable when he discusses ethics than physics. And although I am actually interested in the importance of quantifying the predicate in a syllogism, I don't need to have it explained at length.<br /><br />I look forward to your thoughts on the Greek philosophers (if you do indeed get to them). I also suggest that a thorough grounding in Abbott and Costello is helpful for some of the sophists.<br /><br />(Doug Skinner)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-79946385916853239272022-10-01T15:03:30.615-05:002022-10-01T15:03:30.615-05:00I do think there are more and less literary approa...I do think there are more and less literary approaches. Kierkegaard is a good example for me, since I found the first part of <i>Fear and Trembling</i> to be a brilliant piece of literary criticism - I may well mention it in two weeks when we read <i>Iphigenia in Aulis</i> - and the rest of the book, the "real philosophy," incomprehensible. Something that would require a different approach that I do not think I have at this point.<br /><br />Thanks for the recommendation of Sextus Empiricus. I plan to use Diogenes Laertius as a kind of guide, but I know he is an eccentric one, and likely not much help with the "what is actually readable" question.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-85494468685510933442022-10-01T11:11:08.084-05:002022-10-01T11:11:08.084-05:00I suppose it depends on what a given reader calls ...I suppose it depends on what a given reader calls literature, and calls philosophy, and wants from them. Would Plato have thought he and Kant were in the same genre? I really don't know. <br /><br />"Philosophers" found different ways to write: Plato wrote dialogues, Bruno wrote allegories and sonnets, Kierkegaard invented fictional personas, Wittgenstein invented language games. Are some gambits more "literary" than others? I don't think so, but I may be in the minority.<br /><br />At any rate, if you do dive into Greek philosophers, I recommend Sextus Empiricus, since he's our primary source for Pyrrhonism, which produced some provocative ideas. And he's a witty and inventive writer too (as far as I can tell from translations).<br /><br />(Doug Skinner, still anonymous) Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-70899369636759868542022-09-30T14:36:11.606-05:002022-09-30T14:36:11.606-05:00Why? A lingering anxiety about what really amount...Why? A lingering anxiety about what really amounts to a historical aberration, the stretch of European analytical philosophy from Kant to Heidegger. The practitioners in that feel do not act like the books they like are mere literature. There are some standards in the field that make much of it humanities, but not literature.<br /><br />Even with Plato, reading around in <i>The Cambridge Companion to Plato</i>, there is clearly a way of writing about him that is looks like something else. Whatever that something else is, I call that "philosophy" and I do not understand it well.<br /><br />Luckily Plato is generally well over on the literary side, and easy to enjoy - "entertaining," even.<br /><br />If I organize a Greek philosophy readalong, we'll likely do <i>Republic</i> but not <i>Laws</i>. I am comfortable with political philosophy, and have many ways into <i>Republic</i>. The Atlantis stuff, yes; anything emphasizing the personality of Socrates, yes. Then some aphorists, Aristotle's <i>Ethics</i>, some Plutarch essays. Maybe skip to Latin Epicureans and Stoics on literary grounds. Mix re-reading with books I haven't read. Outside feedback will be most welcome.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-26082770589029799282022-09-30T11:03:26.576-05:002022-09-30T11:03:26.576-05:00I was hugely entertained by the "Symposium&qu...I was hugely entertained by the "Symposium" and very surprised at how much fun it was. I have really enjoyed reading ths dramas too. I shall read "Poetics" next month. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-37783412590217143812022-09-30T08:31:30.024-05:002022-09-30T08:31:30.024-05:00But why does philosophy make you nervous? It's...But why does philosophy make you nervous? It's just another genre of literature, with some books better than others. Overall, I find it more engaging than, say, Westerns. Plato's dialogues are often lively and funny. I found Timaeus and Critias appealingly wacky (numerology and Atlantis!) and the Republic and the Laws mostly dull, but with some provocative ideas.<br /><br />Erik Satie set excerpts from Plato, including a bit from the Symposium, to music in "Socrate." Maybe a listen will whet your appetite for more Plato.<br /><br />As I recall, Aristotle is mostly concerned with Sophocles in the Poetics, especially Oedipus. Maybe that affected our received idea of tragedy.<br /><br />(Doug Skinner)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com