Well, at least I got it up the right week.
Quick review on this week's readings:
April 22 "Fundamental Principles..." by Kant: 4/5 Philosophy where stuff actually matters! Wow!
April 23 King Lear by Shakespeare: 2/5 King Lear is a good play, but this selection is borderline unfollowable without already knowing what's going on.
April 24 Origin of Species by Darwin: 2/5 Much prefer Beagle. Very dry.
April 25 Germany by Tacitus: 2/5 And the candy corn tribe likes bad candy, and is bordered by the Nintendo tribe, who hate the Sega tribe, who trade with the Opinel tribe for pocket knives...
April 26 "Miracles" by Hume: 3/5 Probably least fedora-tippy versions of this essay I've ever read.
April 27 "Beauty" by Emerson: 1/5 Emerson writes a passable essay about novelty, insults everyone, and doesn't really follow his own point.
April 28 Ecclesiastes from The Bible: 2.5/5 Like Job, it's hard to rate this. If we assume Elliot is using it as an example of Christianity/God being terrible, 5/5. If we're meant to read it as a serious ethical/philosophical text 0/5.
Weekly Average: 2.36 This was just a rough week overall. Readings were fairly long on average, and not particularly good. Can we just never do any of the Transcendentalists ever again and replace them with George Sears? He's at least as valid philosophically, actually knows about nature, and is a much better writer.
Overall Thoughts on The Project:
The philosophers scored the two highest marks this week. I've talked before about how I wanted to know more about philosophy, and we're finally getting to some of the ones who seem like they'd be interesting to study in more depth.
No comments:
Post a Comment