27.10.07

the times aren't a changing

"...Conceive this sort of thing happening either on many ships or on one: Picture a shipmaster in height and strength surpassing all others on the ship, but who is slightly deaf and of similarly impaired vision, and whose knowledge of navigation is on a par with his sight and hearing. Conceive the sailors to be wrangling with one another for control of the helm, each claiming that it is his right to steer though he has never learned the art and cannot point out his teacher or any time when he studied it. And what is more, they affirm that it cannot be taught at all, but they are ready to make mincemeat of anyone who says that it can be taught, and meanwhile they are always clustered about the shipmaster importuning him and sticking at nothing to induce him to turn over the helm to them. And sometimes, if they fail and others get his ear, they put the others to death or cast them out from the ship, and then, after binding and stupefying the worthy shipmaster with mandragora or intoxication or otherwise, they take command of the ship, consume its stores and, drinking and feasting, make such a voyage of it as is to be expected from such, and as if that were not enough, they praise and celebrate as a navigator, a pilot, a master of shipcraft, the man who is most cunning to lend a hand in persuading or constraining the shipmaster to let them rule, while the man who lacks this craft they censure as useless. They have no suspicions that the true pilot must give his attention to the time of the year, the seasons, the sky, the winds, the stars, and all that pertains to his art if he is to be a true ruler of a ship, and that he does not believe that there is any art or science of seizing the helm with or without the consent of others, or any possibility of mastering this alleged art and the practice of it at the same time with the science of navigation. With such goings-on aboard ship do you not think that the real pilot would in very deed be called a star-gazer, an idle babbler, a useless fellow, by the sailors in ships managed after this fashion?”
“Quite so,” said Adeimantus.
“You take my meaning, I presume, and do not require us to put the comparison to the proof and show that the condition we have described is the exact counterpart of the relation of the state to the true philosophers.”
“It is indeed,” he said.
“To begin with, then, teach this parable to the man who is surprised that philosophers are not honored in our cities, and try to convince him that it would be far more surprising if they were honored.”
“I will teach him,” he said.
“And say to him further: You are right in affirming that the finest spirit among the philosophers are of no service to the multitude. But bid him blame for this uselessness, not the finer spirits, but those who do not know how to make use of them. For it is not the natural course of things that the pilot should beg the sailors to be ruled by him or that wise men should go to the doors of the rich. The author of that epigram was a liar. But the true nature of things is that whether the sick man be rich or poor he must needs go to the door of the physician, and everyone who needs to be governed to the door of the man who knows how to govern, not that the ruler should implore his natural subjects to let themselves be ruled, if he is really good for anything. But you will make no mistake in likening our present political rulers to the sort of sailors we are just describing, and those whom these call useless and star-gazing ideologists to the true pilots.”
“Just so,” he said.

- Plato, Republic VI.

23.10.07

my two paradoxical emotions

Every so often I become aware they I'm a deeply unhappy person. The source of this unhappiness is so deeply rooted that I cannot see how anyone else could actually be happy. Admittedly a lot of people don't seem to feel the same as me, but of course they're too preoccupied with trifles to think hard or long enough to unearth a deeper unhappiness than mere dissatisfaction of not having what they want.

A little introspection of late has lead me to understand myself as having two major emotional needs. Basically I want to be loved. We all want to be loved. Deeply loved by someone, just loved by a few important people, and unloved by everyone else. Who am I that is loved? If I were someone else would you still love me? If I become someone else will you still love me? Because the other basic emotional need is freedom and independence. I cannot stand being overtly told to do anything, and only hate being implicitly expected to do anything slightly less.

So you see the problem, my emotional needs are fundamentally incompatible. How could I be happy when either one is not satisfied? But how could one possibly be satisfied while the other is? I think I'm deeply broken person, and I think that you are too.

12.10.07

CALLICLES: Is Socrates in earnest, or is he joking?

SOCRATES: I declare, O Callicles, that Callicles will never be at one with himself, but that his whole life will be a discord. And yet, my friend, I would rather that my lyre should be inharmonious, and that there should be no music in the chorus which I provided; aye, or that the whole world should be at odds with me, and oppose me, rather than that I myself should be at odds with myself, and contradict myself.

8.10.07

The Doors

Are you a literate degenerate or wastrel? Then you might enjoy reading The Doors of Perception by Aldous Huxley, The Doors did. Just remember not to come to class tripping.

5.10.07

Langauge, not!

I spent the stroll to uni pondering what a language without negation would be like. You wouldn't be able to distinguish between someone meaning what they said and the opposite of what they said. But I'm more interested to hear what you think, so, thoughts anyone?

4.10.07

Blaise Pascal on

Nature vs. Nurture

Fathers fear in case the natural love of their children is wiped out. So what is this nature capable of being wiped out?

Custom is a second nature which destroys the first.

But what is nature? Why is custom not natural?

I am very much afraid that nature is itself only a first custom, just as custom is a second nature.

& Human Nature.

Human nature can be considered in two ways. One according to our end, and then we are great and incomparable. The other according to the masses, and then we are low and vile. These are the two ways by which we are judged differently, and which make the philosophers argue so furiously.

For one way denies the supposition of the other. One claims: 'We were not born to this end, because all our actions deny it.' The other claims; 'We are distancing ourselves from the end when we commit these base acts.’