Mar 12– “Second Dialogue” (1713) by George Berkeley

 No music

Mar 12– “Second Dialogue” (1713) by George Berkeley

Summary: Berkeley A: Am I smart Berkeley B? Berkeley B: So smart, Berkeley A.

Commentary: Another selection where we could've read the whole thing, but only pull around half. Also feels weird to start with the second dialogue. I've read one or two of these imaginary philosopher conversations before. They've always struck me as equal parts cumbersome, pretentious, and cowardly. Stand for your ideas for their own sake, don't put your words into the mouths of some ancient Greeks (one of whom you're working like a strawman-puppet or a kid playing chess against themselves) to make them sound more authoritative.

This is from one of the "nothing is real" branches of philosophy, which was the only one I studied in undergrad. I'll Bertrand Russel debunk it, since his response is the closest to mine (emphasis added).

If we say that the things known must be in the mind, we are either unduly limiting the mind's power of knowing, or we are uttering a mere tautology. We are uttering a mere tautology if we mean by 'in the mind' the same as by 'before the mind', i.e. if we mean merely being apprehended by the mind. But if we mean this, we shall have to admit that what, in this sense, is in the mind, may nevertheless be not mental. Thus when we realize the nature of knowledge, Berkeley's argument is seen to be wrong in substance as well as in form, and his grounds for supposing that 'ideas'-i.e. the objects apprehended-must be mental, are found to have no validity whatever. Hence his grounds in favour of the idealism may be dismissed.

If nothing is real, nothing matters, and it's all rather pointless. Which is kind of a general philosophy version of the classic Marcus Aurelius:

Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.

If the choice is to live life like things exist and matter, and not, it feels like a pretty obvious choice. And one where the alternative is to just walk in front of a train, since it's all pointless anyway. 

Have some Batman:

Mar 11– “Compensation” (1841) by Ralph Waldo Emerson

No Music

Mar 11– “Compensation” (1841) by Ralph Waldo Emerson 

Summary: Balance, karma, duality, etc. 

Commentary: I've read a little Emerson (and some other Transcendentalism in general) before this. What strikes me the most about it is how similar it is to the (pop culture version of) a lot of Eastern philosophy. I wonder how much, if any, exposure he had.

EDIT: I went back and read the rest of "Compensation" and Emerson provide some solid quotes for his ideas from Western culture, so probably more a case of convergent evolution. I wonder why the selection cuts so early here. The middle third is really the best, and it's short enough Eliot could've included the entire essay and kept within the length we've seen before.

Reflections on Week 10 (Mar 4- Mar 10)

Link to this week's readings

This was a busy week, but I made it!

Quick review on this week's readings:

Mar 4 Some Fruits of Solitude by William Penn: 3/5 I respect him for making an actual list. Not saying he was going to do a list, and then writing a disorganized essay like a lot of people do.

Mar 5 Autobiography of Benvenuto Cellini: 2/5 One of these was enough.

Mar 6 "The Raven" by Edgar Allen Poe: 4/5 Great poem!

Mar 7 "Of Judicature" by Francis Bacon: 3/5 Include more works on important but little understood subjects!

Mar 8 Don Quixote by Miguel De Cervantes: 2/5 This section in isolation doesn't really work.

Mar 9 "Treatise on Good Manners and Good Breeding" by Jonathon Swift: 2/5 Swift's satire is a little dry for my tastes. Why pick these over "A Modest Proposal" or something?

Mar 10 Philaster by Beuamont and Flescher: 3/5 Hard to judge plays by writing, but seems good.

Weekly Average: 2.71 Pretty average week all around. This is definitely easier to do now that I've thought out the scores a bit better.

Overall Thoughts on The Project:

While not as odious as Burns (who should've never have been included in the first place) I'm not looking forward to more Cellini. He's too embellished to be a good autobiography, but not exciting/interesting enough to be a swashbuckling fiction story a la The Three Musketeers. Most interesting inclusion this week was Bacon's. There's a lot of things about the world/society and how it works that most people don't know a lot about or think about a ton, but are good to know. This was a great introduction to some basic principles of jurisprudence. It'd be really cool to see selections on (making this list up on the spot) leadership, first aid, government (we've gotten a few of these), cooking... A liberal education should prepare you to be a functional and independent member of society, and there's a lot of things that would be good to know.

Mar 10– From Philaster (1610?) by Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher

 No Music

Mar 10– From Philaster (1610?) by Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher

Summary: King wants daughter to marry guy. Daughter wants to marry someone else. Everyone spreads rumors about everyone else having an affair. You know the drill.

Commentary: Another play with no (easily accessible) versions for me to watch. It seems clever enough, a couple good bits of wordplay in this excerpt. As I've said several times before, it's hard to really give a good opinion of a play from only reading an excerpt.

Mar 9– “A Treatise on Good Manners and Good Breeding” (1738?) by Jonathon Swift

 No Music

Mar 9– “A Treatise on Good Manners and Good Breeding” (1738?) by Jonathon Swift

Summary: Jonathon Swift satirizes manners.

Commentary: I've always found Swift's satire a little dry. I used to think that was primarily a factor of age/culture, but as I've enjoyed some older and/or more foreign works in T5FSOB (Don Quixote is nearly a hundred years older, and was written in Spanish, but it's still funny) I'm starting to think it's more him specifically. Yes, some people use good manners as an excuse to be an asshole. Yes, sometimes people have manners that're good in a given situation but not in others. Thanks JS, great insight there.

May 8– From "Don Quixote" by Cervantes (1605) Translated by Thomas Shelton

 No music

May 8– From Don Quixote by Cervantes (1605) Translated by Thomas Shelton

Summary: A guy tries to get his best friend to seduce his wife.

Commentary: Where are we? Seriously, we pick up like 250 pages later in DQ than the last time, and we're in the middle of a story someone (a priest if my Googling is correct) is telling a story to DQ and a group of travelers. Maybe in context it makes more sense, but isolated like this it just feels weird. This is the first known appearance of a character named Lothario (though he's not particularly lecherous). His friend wants him to seduce his wife. His friend sucks. We don't get far enough to find out if he succeed!

Mar 7– “Of Judicature” by Francis Bacon (1612)

 No Music

Mar 7– “Of Judicature” by Francis Bacon (1612)

Summary: Kevin Francis Bacon explains the role of judges, and his opinions on judicial philosophy. 

Commentary: I think Bacon's theories are fairly agreeable (more that they're kind of basic and hard to argue with.) More importantly, this is a great "survey" type writing for something that more people should know about, but probably don't. What does a judge do? What kind of principles are they supposed to abide by? I wouldn't mind TF5SOB had more of this type of reading about background societal knowledge. I also appreciate that he translates his own Latin. Until he stops halfway thought.