Hmm. Noble lies. Interesting. I try to live with "honesty is the best policy." I'm not sure what I would say to the unmasked man at the doctor's office. Does he deserve the truth? That might be a different question. Don't we all, and isn't the problem that he wasn't told the truth by those he trusted?
Jeff, I agree with everything you say, and I'll defer to you on philosophical matters. In these essays, I never have time to get into the complexities of an issue, which is good for my reader, because my mind can never rest long enough on an idea to do justice to it. But I do have a problem with both incoherent philosophy and literary criticism, especially the latter. My friend, who is a retired philosophy professor, once said that the literary criticism (rich in semiotics and deconstruction) of the 1970s and 1980s was "bad" philosophy, written by English professors who wanted to be philosophers. My favorite story of his was about when he and three other philosophy professors got into a car accident and had to go to court, and how the judge became frustrated with them because of all the multifarious ways they were deconstructing the event. It would have made a great Monty Python sketch.
Yes, but I don't say the above with any sense of superiority. Much of my poetry is really a veiled attempt to make fun of that Peter Johnson who thinks he can change the world. Nothing like self-deprecation to one honest. Hope all is well.
Actually, Peter, this post reminds me of the poem
"Epitaph for a Poet" by Octavio Paz:
He wanted to sing, to sing
to forget
his true life of lies
and to remember
his lying life of truths.
being born of common or plebeian origin /
only ignoble truths reigned in my family /
prevarication is not the sole possession
of one political party over the other /
after all / we are all living on the margin as
there is no longer any center.
Yes, but we will have to hope that that "center" indeed holds
Peter, am I missing something?
My point is, there is no "center."
Would you like me to define the "center lost"?
I'd rather not, but in a nod to Milton, I'm talking
about "Center Lost."
I was trying to be optimistic, which is a rarity for me, which explains why I couldn't pull it off.
Ha! You violated the first credo of philosophical
pessimism, Peter. You haven't been reading
Dale Carnegie now have you? 😗
What is with the attack on philosophy?
Hmm. Noble lies. Interesting. I try to live with "honesty is the best policy." I'm not sure what I would say to the unmasked man at the doctor's office. Does he deserve the truth? That might be a different question. Don't we all, and isn't the problem that he wasn't told the truth by those he trusted?
Jeff, I agree with everything you say, and I'll defer to you on philosophical matters. In these essays, I never have time to get into the complexities of an issue, which is good for my reader, because my mind can never rest long enough on an idea to do justice to it. But I do have a problem with both incoherent philosophy and literary criticism, especially the latter. My friend, who is a retired philosophy professor, once said that the literary criticism (rich in semiotics and deconstruction) of the 1970s and 1980s was "bad" philosophy, written by English professors who wanted to be philosophers. My favorite story of his was about when he and three other philosophy professors got into a car accident and had to go to court, and how the judge became frustrated with them because of all the multifarious ways they were deconstructing the event. It would have made a great Monty Python sketch.
I can imagine the scenario you paint of the courtroom of philosophers. So silly.
Yes, but I don't say the above with any sense of superiority. Much of my poetry is really a veiled attempt to make fun of that Peter Johnson who thinks he can change the world. Nothing like self-deprecation to one honest. Hope all is well.