I don’t know how anyone can read this and not talk about the various things I talk about!
Philosophy’s concern is precisely to uncover, beneath the web of officially sanctioned opinions which defines a particular society’s way of life, the principle that exists independently of any human will
My conscience would kill me if I didn’t talk about what I do.
All these academics, how do they do it, it boggles my mind.
Someone who studies Spinoza for instance for all their life. It must be a mere “hobby” to them. It’s like a model airplane collection or some shit. What really defines our society’s way of life, ask yourself. They don’t answer that accurately. What are you doing?!
I can only conclude that it is not “deconcealed” to them. Because they are society WITH that way of life.
And then there’s the level of them technically being able to say what the way of life is without judging it negatively, and they can’t even do that. It’s a mystery to me why they don’t do it. Don’t you want to be more conscious of what’s going on? “Yes, this is what we believe, this this and this, because of this and that, and also that.” Say it. Why not?
They only do it instead of saying it.
“I’m not walking the plank, shut. the. fuck. up. They will make me walk the plank into the shark-infested waters!” Society’s pretty brutal, isn’t it?
This is 13th century University of Paris, my how times have changed
It is true that the theologians and the “artists” did not fear to undertake new investigations… Likewise they believed that it was their duty to proclaim, if needed, certain truths that could easily displease the rich and powerful.
You’ll just be tainted with an “evil” aura for the rest of your life for one slip. Is that nerve-wracking? Or did you just “let go” of that side of yourself that’s independent, many years ago?
Anyway, to contextualize Dante, he was born about a century after Aristotle began to be recovered in the west. So he was in a way part of these debates in the academy with his poems and other writings. These debates on reconciling Athens and Jerusalem.
Most people to this day interpret his chief work either as theology or poetry
in the Letter to Cangrande Dante insists one should have recourse not to theology but to philosophical ethics for guidance in understanding the moral sense of his poem.
Isn’t it funny that people tend to approach art as something that doesn’t involve morality? That’s how you’re made into its object, you do what it wants you to do without realizing it. That might not be such a bad thing in the case of Dante. Still, I want to know more about it from his point of view, similar to wanting to understand J’s point of view. So, similar to the way I was looking at Virgil the other day, if he wrote his poem as a Platonist of sorts I want to see it through his eyes in that way. This book is great in that regard so far