My esteemed philosopher,
In response to the writing of Dostoyevsky, you wrote in your last post,
"Artificially trying to stop this pursuit and be happy with an achieved state is a reactionary position not worthy of philosopher, for whom exploration never stops as he discovers new depths (Socrates’ famous assertion about not knowing anything)."
A philosopher should always question what he or she knows and seek the always greater perspective. But I believe Dostoyevsky keeps coming back to an elemental truth that brotherhood and cameraderie are ultimately more beatiful than experiments of thought. This point seems to me what much of his writing, especially Crime and Punishment leaves me with. Some thought experiments and systems are exorcises in masturbation, and I think it is those he rejects. I found an echo of the theme in this poem by Walt Whitman.
The Base of All Metaphysics
And now gentleman,
A word I give to remainin your memories and minds,
As base and finale too for all metaphysics.
(So to the students the old professor,
At the close of his crowded course.)
Having studied the new and antique, the Greek and German systems,
Kant having studied and stated, Fichte and Schelling and Hegel,
Stated the lore of Plato, and Socrates greater than Plato,
And greater than Socrates sought and stated,
Christ divine having studied long,
I see reminiscent to-day those Greek and Germanic systems,
See the philosophies all, Christian churches and tenets see,
Yet underneath Socrates clearly see, and underneath Christ the divine I see,
The dear love of man for his comrade, the attraction of friend to friend,
Of the well-married husband and wife, of children and parents,
Of city for city and land for land.
- What do you think of this sentiment? Do you think this could be the truth in Dostoyevsky's philosophy that is being overlooked? I tend to think so, but i am curious what you think.
Подписаться на:
Комментарии к сообщению (Atom)
1 комментарий:
I would agree with the idea itself. It is so lofty it is actually a borderline truism (do we need an entire Crime and Punishment or The Idiot to remind us of that)?
Incidently, I spent a few hours the other day at the University Bookstore browsing through the philosophy shelf and the verses from Evgeniy Onegin were spinning in my head where in a few lines he nails the boredom and dishonesty contained in modern books (same applies here). I mean, not a single original though had crossed my field of mental vision! I ended up buying Aristotle's Metaphisics, Seneca's Epistles and Cicero's De Natura Divina.
So here is the curx of the matter. Philosophy, as demonstrated by the great minds from Plato to Hegel, and forward is not an experiment in thinking. The goal of philosophy is to find Truth. That, I believe, is the goal of poetry as well. This is a steep uphill path which it is nearly impossible for one to master on his own. In that journey we need teachers who start us out, friends who help us along the way, and students who come after us, and, with our help surpass us. Human contact is not just an idea here it is a dire necessity.
And that is exactly what the professor is telling his students in the Whitman's poem. NOT that the systems of philosophy are themselves superfulous to human love, but the other way around: they bring out the love of people for each other and truly display its nature by showing, that only through love can quest for the Truth be accomplished.
The important thing here is not a jusxterposition of love vs. thought, but a complete harmony and unity. Real, true love (as Whitman's professor says) only comes through Kant, Socrates, and Jesus, because those people's teachings could not be realized in any other way than raising human beings on a higher spiritual level together through love.
Now, do we need Dostoyevsky to remind us of that in many a multi-page novel, all of which are actually sort of awkard philosophical treteases? I still do not think so. Their literary quality is admittedly poor and the philosophical content is not at all new.
Отправить комментарий