.

And by a prudent flight and cunning save A life which valour could not, from the grave. A better buckler I can soon regain, But who can get another life again? Archilochus

Friday, June 21, 2019

Disorder Under Heaven...

Authentic "free choice", at its' most radical, is always experienced as "Necessity."
-Slavoj Zizek, "The Paradox du Jour"

14 comments:

Franco Aragosta said...

__ VOCATIONAL TRAINING __

More and more these days
___ I find myself sincerely wishin'
Our kids would aim to be a builder,
___ plumber, or 'lectrician ––
Or groundsman who trims hedges, bushes,
__ mows and weeds the grass).
Better that than Jewish, Black,
___ Female or Queer Studies
Is the gal who cooks and cleans
___ while her mate drinks with his buddies.
After he works his butt off collecting
___ other peoples' trash
He deserves a nice clean home,
___ good food, and a place to crash,
An eager warm wet pussy there
___ to meet his carnal needs,
And kids he loves and cares for
__ striving even if he bleeds.
Better to be a farmer milking cows
___ and cleaning stables
Than to study at a college where each course
___ your mind disables.


... FreeThinke

Franco Aragosta said...

The nearer I get to my EIGHTIETH birthday the less toleance I have for bULLSHIT.

Joe Conservative said...

You're coming full circle...

tyranny (infant), monarchy (marriage), democracy (family), monarchy (empty nest), tyranny (old man)...

Franco Aragosta said...

BULLSHIT!

~ Eternal Truth that knows no chronological age, no era of ephemeral fashion, or geographical location.

"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty ..."

The implication there is that everything else is a lie.

Joe Conservative said...

Beauty isn't truth... truth is only one of several of its' proportions.

Jowett introduction to Plato's "Philebus":

in this mixed class we find the idea of beauty. Good, when exhibited under the aspect of measure or symmetry, becomes beauty. And if we translate his language into corresponding modern terms, we shall not be far wrong in saying that here, as well as in the Republic, Plato conceives beauty under the idea of proportion.
---
Philebus affirmed pleasure to be the good, and assumed them to be one nature; I affirmed that they were two natures, and declared that knowledge was more akin to the good than pleasure. I said that the two together were more eligible than either taken singly; and to this we adhere. Reason intimates, as at first, that we should seek the good not in the unmixed life, but in the mixed.

The cup is ready, waiting to be mingled, and here are two fountains, one of honey, the other of pure water, out of which to make the fairest possible mixture. There are pure and impure pleasures—pure and impure sciences. Let us consider the sections of each which have the most of purity and truth; to admit them all indiscriminately would be dangerous. First we will take the pure sciences; but shall we mingle the impure—the art which uses the false rule and the false measure? That we must, if we are any of us to find our way home; man cannot live upon pure mathematics alone. And must I include music, which is admitted to be guess-work? 'Yes, you must, if human life is to have any humanity.' Well, then, I will open the door and let them all in; they shall mingle in an Homeric 'meeting of the waters.' And now we turn to the pleasures; shall I admit them? 'Admit first of all the pure pleasures; secondly, the necessary.' And what shall we say about the rest? First, ask the pleasures—they will be too happy to dwell with wisdom. Secondly, ask the arts and sciences—they reply that the excesses of intemperance are the ruin of them; and that they would rather only have the pleasures of health and temperance, which are the handmaidens of virtue. But still we want truth? That is now added; and so the argument is complete, and may be compared to an incorporeal law, which is to hold fair rule over a living body. And now we are at the vestibule of the good, in which there are three chief elements—truth, symmetry, and beauty. These will be the criterion of the comparative claims of pleasure and wisdom.

Which has the greater share of truth? Surely wisdom; for pleasure is the veriest impostor in the world, and the perjuries of lovers have passed into a proverb.

Which of symmetry? Wisdom again; for nothing is more immoderate than pleasure.

Which of beauty? Once more, wisdom; for pleasure is often unseemly, and the greatest pleasures are put out of sight.

Not pleasure, then, ranks first in the scale of good, but measure, and eternal harmony.

Second comes the symmetrical and beautiful and perfect.


Third, mind and wisdom.

Fourth, sciences and arts and true opinions.

Fifth, painless pleasures.

Of a sixth class, I have no more to say. Thus, pleasure and mind may both renounce the claim to the first place. But mind is ten thousand times nearer to the chief good than pleasure. Pleasure ranks fifth and not first, even though all the animals in the world assert the contrary.

Joe Conservative said...

...and that is the ugly truth! ;p

Franco Aragosta said...

MY FRIEND, I CATGORICALLY REJECT YOUR APPARENT ASSIN FOR EMBRACING THE MAD, ANTI-CHRISTIAN PHILSOPHIES ad SOPHISTRY THAT DESIRE ABOVE ALL TO MAKE SIMPLE TRUTHS APPEAR OBSCURE, RECONDITE UNNECESSARILY ARCANE and UNATTAINABLE.


___________ The Wages of Sin ___________

Dreary and confounding though it be
Each nubile female must be made to face
A battery of choices seriously ––
The wrong one could bring sorrow and disgrace.
Harvesting the crop from seeds we sow
Our choice to gratify ourselves might win
Fearful consequences, if we fail to show
Awareness of the pain that follows sin.
Zygotes inadvertently conceived
Yield far-reaching complications dire.
Gestation offers duties unrelieved,
Or the alternative –– the prospect of hellfire.
The choice to live life loosely takes a toll
Excluding most things charming, fun and droll.


~ FreeThinke

Franco Aragosta said...

If Zizek's possessed of Veracity
Too often he uses Loquacity.
His obscurantist Theory
Makes hearers grow weary,
As he conflates Prolix with Sagacity!

Stanley Kowalski said...

If Beauty were Truth, why would there be two words for the same thing?

Stanley Kowalski said...

Earl of Occham "...and if simplicity were always "king" why would the Holy Trinity require three concepts?"

Stanley Kowalski said...

It's because of the "gap" between language and reality. There's always something missing from language... a little je nous se qua.

Stanley Kowalski said...

"Holy Spirit"... or objet petit 'a

Franco Aragosta said...

TO yOUR REMARK ON thE INAEQUAY OF LANGUAGE:

Yes to a certain extent, but then it all depends on how much curiosity one possesses and talent one has for being able "to read between the lines."

I think it safe to say that all human knowledge –– and virtually everythng of value our species has produced–– began with someone's DREAM VISION –– from INTUITION ––, which eventually by dint o much tral and error was made manifest. That, I believe, is why Einstein firmly declared "Imagination is more important than knowledge."

The most finely crafted, highly original and most beautiful poetry probably strikes "the Average Joe" like so much tedious gibberish. The most beautiful paintings, pieces of sculpture and exquisitely designed and magnificently appointed houses and other significant architectural accomplishments are met with indifference –– even hostility –– by Have-Nots with a peasantine mentality.

The same is true of classical music. As Heifetz said of the Bach Chaconne for unaccompanied violin –– a tremondous, monumental masterpiece for which the great violnist was justifiably famous –– "To the connsoisseur the Chaconne is a sublme experience –– a virtual trip to Heaven. To the ignorant or tone deaf it probably feels like twenty minutes in the dentist's chair sans anesthetic."

Heifetz was not devoid of humor –– part of the reason he was so highly regarded I'm pretty sure.

We are not all alike by any means. "EQUALITY" is a dangerous, franky nonsensical myth, and that is why we must NEVER allow ourselves to be governed by enforced conformity to the Lowest Common Denominator.

MEDIOCRITY may be the norm –– a reality we must learn to accept ––, but it should NEVER be considered the STANDARD to which anyone should aspire.

Franco Aragosta said...

A person of too broad a range

Who advocates unthinking change

Fails to discriminate

Between first and second-rate

Thus proving his mind's got the mange.

A show of things worthy of pride

Will attract those compelled to deride

Any person at all

Who has more on the ball

Than those who enjoy being snide.


~ Honey Boohoo