(Y1 W52) One Year Down!

I hope everyone is making the most of their precious-few hours of 2013 left. What better way to use the time than reading and thinking about the Great Books? For me, this first year has been full of ups and downs: the ups stemming from the rewards of reading; the downs from the costs of spending the time to do it. So, my New Year's resolution for the Great Books is to find creative way to minimize the costs. We'll see how it goes. One year down, six to go. Happy New Year!

Moby Dick - Herman Melville, Ch. 93-101: Jolly young Pip is traumatized by being abandoned in the ocean for a time. The try-works (kiln) are started up on deck giving a crazed image of a ship that "seems material counterpart of her monomaniac commander's soul". The men compare doubloon's image of mountains to Ahab, take them to be signs of Moby Dick's forthcoming appearance. They meet an English ship that encountered Moby Dick. The mangled, one-armed captain thinks it's foolish to seek him again: "Ain't one limb enough?" Ahab leaves in a huff. Very "literary" in that Melville feels complete freedom to abandon plot and use any related discussion as a device to highlight something about Ahab, but when he returns to plot - like with the encounter with the English ship - what a device it becomes! Such a contrast between the two captains put in the exact same situation.

The United States in 1800 - Henry Adams: U.S. was still uncivilized, sparse, and provincial in 1800. It looked "sad" to outsiders, but Americans saw only potential in the wilderness - "victory" through a successful economy. New spirit that sought economic potential (read: "the American Dream") had replaced older "missions" of original colonies (i.e. virtue, communal love, etc.). Outcome seen in list of men who were raised humbly yet transformed the world - "all their inventions transmuted the democratic instinct into a practical and tangible shape". Beautifully written, yet must be read slowly to do the word-pictures justice (for me at least). I want to agree with his commentary on the history, but my skeptical side makes me wary of jumping to conclusions, especially when he's basing his conclusions on things like Jefferson's secret inner life (which apparently isn't so secret).

Rules for the Direction of the Mind - Rene Descartes, Rule I-XI: End of study is sound and correct judgement on all things considered. Education should be integrated, limited by student's potential. Conclusions to be sought by deduction/intuition, which can bring certainty. Proper method of thinking consists entirely of ordering conclusions: from simplest (surest) to more complex in one "continuous movement". Such habits built by understanding simple everyday truths "clearly and distinctly". You can see his bias towards mathematics. How much is a method like this thwarted by the contingencies of the physical world? It's easy to see where postmoderns poke holes in his quest for certainty. Some useful comments on education though.

Sanity of True Genius - Charles Lamb: Contrary to what some people think, the greatest wits are always the sanest writers. Dull wits explore the unnatural, explicate nonsense using realistic images from their passive imaginations. Great wits use active imaginations to take us far away in appearance, yet "we are at home, and upon acquaintable ground". Great anti-Romantic depiction of the mind. It's also very at-home with a teleological view of the mind's functioning: efficiency of thought is, like all proper functioning, more in-line with the reality of the function's goal than not.

On the Loadstone - William Gilbert, Book VI: What of the earth as a loadstone? Its magnetic axis remains invariable, despite what some believe. Idea of heavenly "spheres" revolving around the earth every 24 hours is vastly more inefficient/unlikely than the simple idea of earth itself rotating. Earth rotates in a circle - diurnal motion due to its magnetic energy. Planets, moon, stars move similarly. Great reasoning. Doesn't seem to have much to do with magnetism though. If you remove his hypothesis that magnetism causes the earth's rotation, this chapter is totally unconnected to the rest. Good-bye, Gilbert.

Politics - Aristotle, Book VI: What are the types of organization among democracies and other forms of government? For democracy, chief differences due to population type or the efficiency of different combinations of the democratic characteristics. Basis of democracy is: liberty; all living as they like; payment for services. Best democracy is one for agrarian society; second-best for pastoral people. Democracy where "all share alike" is difficult to make work. Must make laws that will preserve the state. Oligarchies: best is like constitutional government. Its preservation depends on good order. All states need to fill essential offices. Seems that ancient Greek city-states were a perfect laboratory to observe these different forms of government. Much like the U.S. founding father's political ideas, these seem based on experience more than simple genius insight into the consequences of political variables.

Here's the first readings for 2014:

1. Moby Dick by Herman Melville, Ch. 102-132  (GBWW Vol. 48, pp. 204-246)
2. “Of Repentance” by Michel de Montaigne (GBWW Vol. 23, pp. 429-436)
3. Rules for the Direction of the Mind by René Descartes, XII-XVI (GBWW Vol. 28, pp. 240-257;  Here is a volume containing the entire text.)
4. “Of Seditions and Troubles” by Francis Bacon (GGB Vol. 7, pp. 12-17)
5. “Probability” by Pierre Simon de Laplace (GGB Vol. 9, pp. 325-338; Chapters I-IV of A Philosophical Essay on Probability)
6. The Politics of Aristotle, Book VII (GBWW Vol. 8, pp. 527-542)

(Y1 W51) Of Changes in the Earth and State

I hope everyone is having a merry pre-Christmas. This week's readings were shorter, which, for me at least, was helpful at this time of year. One more week then we're done with Year 1!

Moby Dick - Herman Melville, Ch. 76-92: Tashtego falls inside a whale as it's sinking. Queequeg jumps in and cuts him out. They out-chase a German vessel to a pod and kill the older male. Outrun Malay pirates and find themselves in a massive pod (but kill only one). Explains fast-fish/loose-fish laws of whaling. Meet a French whaling ship with a newby captain and trick him out of a dead whale, recovering prized ambergris out of it. Melville is quite literate and runs the full breadth of biblical and classical references.

The Virginia Constitution - Thomas Jefferson: Despite promising early origins of American colonies, rights quickly began to be threatened by the British crown. Eventually, "no alternative was presented but resistance or unconditional surrender," hence the rebellion started. The first Constitution had many defects: majority not properly represented, an "elective despotism" fell into the hands of legislative", etc. It's best to fix the Constitution and "amend its defects". He really doesn't like the idea of a dictator - he went off on the idea for several pages at the end. This highlights, again, how the founding fathers saw the need for separation of powers out of actual events they witnessed and not just because they were drop-dead brilliant.

Geological Evolution - Charles Lyell: Everyone recognizes the earth has gone through changes - the causes of such changes are the things in question. The major problem in approaching the question is geologists' "ignorance respecting the operations of the existing agents of change". They must take into account "gradual mutations now in progress". This is the "alphabet and grammar of geology", which we will eventually use to contemplate more general questions. Such a simple, yet profound project.

Of Cannibals - Montaigne: We need to judge things for ourselves, not take our ideas from common report. Descriptions of New World peoples are not of a barbarous people, but of those "having received but very little form and fashion from art and human invention". They're more like noble savages. We exceed them in barbarity by our practices. It seems he's right about some things (extent of barbarity in the Europeans of the time), wrong about others (the plenitude and near-innocence of primitive peoples in the Americas).

On the Loadstone - William Gilbert, Book V: Now, we'll look into the "dip" motion of the loadstone ("one end or pole tending toward the earth's center"). Describes an instrument to measure it with. At the equator, the dip is nil; completely dipped at the poles. It's not from coition. Variation in dip seen in navigation is also due to unevenness of earth's surface. Earth, stars, etc. really do have "souls" or animating principles. Though they're not thinking souls, they do work reasonably "from the very foundations and beginnings of the world", we're just too weak in our souls to understand them. Most of it seems like it'd be quite helpful for navigation. The philosophizing was interesting. Makes me want to jump to that section in Aristotle.

Politics - Aristotle, Book V: Now, onto causes of revolutions and modes of state preservation. Two kinds of changes: 1) those affecting the constitution; 2) changes in administration. "Everywhere inequality is a cause of revolution, but an inequality in which there is no proportion." Revolutions effected in two ways: 1) by force; 2) by fraud. To preserve oligarchies and democracies: maintain obedience to laws; guard against beginning of change; don't let magistrates make money. Education should conform to type of government. Moral relativism is wrong. Monarchies preserved by limiting power; tyrannies by: 1) oppression; 2) appearing to rule like a good king. Good mix of his theoretical approach (listing out all possible options) along with real-world examples.

Here's the readings for this week:

1. Moby Dick by Herman Melville, Ch. 93-101  (GBWW Vol. 48, pp. 188-204)
2. “The United States in 1800” by Henry Adams (GGB Vol. 6, pp. 322-359; Vol. I, Ch. I and VI of History of the United States of America During the Administrations of Thomas Jefferson)
3. Rules for the Direction of the Mind by René Descartes, I-XI (GBWW Vol. 28, pp. 223-240; Here is a volume containing the entire text.)
4. “Sanity of True Genius” by Charles Lamb (GBB Vol. 5, pp. 308-310)
5. On the Loadstone and Magnetic Bodies by William Gilbert, Book VI (GBWW Vol. 26, pp. 106-121)
6. The Politics of Aristotle, Book VI (GBWW Vol. 8, pp. 520-526)

(Y1 W50) Commit It to the Flames - It Contains Only Sophistry and Illusion

This week we'll start our last pre-Christmas set of readings. Of course, Christmas seems to last all December any more, only it appears in different dilutions at different times. It's also nearing the end of the year and we just finished two more authors: Hamilton and Hume. It always feels nice to finish an author - and some more than others.

Moby Dick - Herman Melville, Ch. 55-75: A squid is mistaken for Moby Dick. Stubb kills a sperm whale and eats part of it for dinner (yum!) while making the cook "preach" to the noisy sharks eating at the whale's body. The blubber is stripped off in layers. They cut off the whale's head and attach it to the side of the ship. Ahab beckons to the whale head to tell of the mysteries of the sea. Have a partial "gam" with the Jeroboam, who hunted Moby Dick unsuccessfully. So many non-fiction asides on the ins and outs of whaling. It's certainly interesting, but it'd never be published today. More biblical references with Jeroboam and Gabriel. The message: bad people hunt Moby Dick while the prophets warn them not to.

First Inaugural Address - Abraham Lincoln: Southern states have nothing to fear from a Republican administration. I have no intention to interfere with slavery where it exists. Our union must be maintained. If it's broken, it is so by you. Only debate is over issue of slavery and its extension. No state can lawfully exit the Union. If you want change, amend the Constitution. "Succession is the essence of anarchy." The issue of civil war is in your hands, not mine. Very politically savy. He said nothing of his own views on the issue while putting the burden of war on his opponents.

An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding - David Hume, Sect. X-XII: Evidence for Christianity less than sense evidence and "a weaker evidence can never destroy a stronger". Beliefs must correspond to the evidence. Eyewitness evidence only reliable when it conforms with natural uniformity: hence, miracles must be denied categorically. Religion is founded on "faith", not reason anyway. Can't argue for designer in nature because effects don't warrant the cause. "Design" in nature needs to take into account the "evil and disorder" of the world. Best skepticism is not total - but staying within the realm of uniformity and experience. So much can be said about this. I do wonder how much of this originates from his elitism. His position ends up not only being circular, but it also just looks like rather childish to cross your arms, fling your nose up in the air and say, "I'll only believe it if I see it...and even then I'm going to come up with some other explanation."

Federalist Papers #84, 85 - Alexander Hamilton: 84) Complaints over lack of a bill of rights are misplaced. Such provisions are embedded in the Constitution itself. It's better to not have one because they limit powers ungranted to the government. Can't define "liberty of the press" anyway. Its security should be "public opinion...general spirit of the people and the government". New Constitution wouldn't incur much new expense either. 85) Series of papers now completed. Most have already approved the Constitution. Don't reject it because it's "not perfect". "I never expect to see a perfect work from imperfect man," and more debate will only make it worse. Amending is better than starting over. "A nation without a national government is, in my view, an awful spectacle." Here comes one final strong push for a trust in centralized government. We certainly see here some shortsightedness on the bill of rights and on the increase of expenses with a national government.

On the Loadstone - William Gilbert, Book IV: What is the cause of magnetic variance? It's different from magnetic direction. Variance = changes over an arc based around meridian. Earth causes variance in compasses: raised land masses cause variance in ships near coasts. Higher latitudes have greater variance. Compasses are made differently, work differently and this causes problems in navigation. Theory used to predict that there are no hidden land masses in the Arctic Ocean. Here, we see theory (land mass causes variance) and a prediction based on it (no land masses in Arctic because no variance). Such condescending statements to his rivals though!

Politics - Aristotle, Book IV: Statesmen need to know: 1) best in abstract and 2) practice; 3) how governments formed/preserved; 4) best form of government in general. Examines constitutional government. There's as many forms of government as there are methods of arranging offices. Eight social classes. Five forms of democracy, three of oligarchy. Constitutional government is mix of democracy and oligarchy. Two parts of good government: goodness of laws, obedience of citizens. "Best political community is formed by citizens of the middle class." who hold upper/lower classes in check. Three elements of Constitution: 1) deliberative (like combined executive/legislative); 2) magistrates; 3) judicial. Much of this was laying out the possibilities, not giving his assessment; major exception being the assertion of the importance of the middle class.

Here's this week's readings:

1. Moby Dick by Herman Melville, Ch. 76-92  (GBWW Vol. 48, pp. 154-188)
2. “The Virginia Constitution” by Thomas Jefferson (GGB Vol. 6, pp. 502-517; Query 13 of Notes on Virginia)
3. “Geological Evolution” by Sir Charles Lyell (GGB Vol. 8, pp. 319-324; Principles of Geology Vol. III, Ch. I)
4. “Of Cannibals” by Michel de Montaigne (GBWW Vol. 23, pp. 143-149)
5. On the Loadstone and Magnetic Bodies by William Gilbert, Book V (GBWW Vol. 26, pp. 92-105)
6. The Politics of Aristotle, Book V (GBWW Vol. 8, pp. 502-519)

(Y1 W49) Goodbye America - Don't Screw It Up

Happy mid-December winter lull, especially for those in white and snowy parts. Once again, I'm trying to lessen the amount of text (summary) for each entry in a long-term effort to make this more manageable. It's okay, I'm keeping my own personal notes while I read (though, I'm trying to shorten those as well).

Moby Dick - Herman Melville, Ch. 40-52: "Fish stories" told about Moby Dick are revealed. Ahab sees Moby Dick as the incarnation of all the evil that eats away at him from the inside. The men lower their boats and give chase to a whale, but a boat is accidentally overrun by their ship in the chase. They pass by another ship, but don't interact with them. A story is then told of the Town-Ho's encounter with Moby Dick where he ate one of their mates in the midst of a mutiny. Melville really loves the ocean and gives himself the liberty to explain everything he thinks needs explaining. It's almost more non-fiction than it is fiction.

The Farewell Address - George Washington: Here, I'm informing everyone that I'll be retiring to private life and not seeking a third term of election. The unity of the nation must be maintained - a "main prop of your liberty". Live contently under the new Constitution and resist the "spirit of party" that divides people. Resist also the "spirit of encroachment" of one part of government into another. National morality is essential and religious piety is essential to that. Promote schools, avoid debt, cultivate peace with other nations but avoid their affairs. His fatigue with public life really comes through. I wonder what he'd say about America's involvements in foreign affairs over the last century or so.

An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding - David Hume, Sect. VIII-IX: In the debate over "liberty and necessity" all really agree with each other, only they use ambiguous terms. Idea of a necessity between cause and effect arises from ideas we create from the observed uniformity in nature. Liberty = power of willfully acting. If God made man, then either man is good (because God is good) or God is guilty of man's crimes. Answering that God allows the best possible world, which includes evil, is uncomforting. Animals learn from experience without using reason, so do children, men, and philosophers. Saying a solution to the problem of evil is uncomforting is not the same as saying it's wrong. I must have missed his solution on genuine liberty. Is he saying there's no true liberty, and God is guilty because we're determined by Him or because God's omniscient? Omniscience is not determinism.

Federalist Papers #82, 83 - Alexander Hamilton: 82) On the question of concurrent jurisdiction of federal and state courts: "States will retain all preexisting authorities which may not be exclusively delegated to the federal head." Only three cases where that occurs. 83) Some object to the Constitution over "the want of a constitutional provision for the trial by jury in civil cases." But silence on this point doesn't mean restriction; the legislative can still adopt juries or not. I'm no legal expert and so I'm getting a little lost in some of these later papers, but it does seem like the "leaving it open" clause is itself susceptible to mischief.

On the Loadstone - William Gilbert, Book III: Now to set forth the "causes and efficiencies" of the loadstone. The directive force ("verticity") is distributed equally both ways to the poles and produces the magnetic movement. Iron rubbed in one part receives magneticism in the whole in the opposite verticity. Supposed contrary movement of two magnets is really a tendency towards union. Magnet's verticity can be established during smelting process. There is only a true north and south in magnets; no east, west, etc. The south part of a magnet increases the strength of the north. Porta has this crazy idea that magnets' energy comes from particle exchange. Interesting. I assume this section is quite helpful to those involved in such matters.

Politics - Aristotle, Book III: A state is a composite of citizens. Citizens are those who share in a common "indefinite office". State seeks "the purposes of life", is defined by its constitution, and appropriate virtue of a citizen is relative to that (i.e. different kinds of states require different citizens). Three true kinds of government: royalty, aristocracy, constitutional government (their respective perversions: tyranny, oligarchy, democracy). The end of political science is justice. Five types of monarchy considered. Need good laws, but someone to override them when they "miss the mark". All rulers should have the same education/habits. Heavy discussion on monarchy; little on democracy. The "overrider" aspect is what Locke and the founding fathers have been emphasizing as part of the executive office. Would have liked to see him go a bit more into his fear of rule of law.

Here's this week's readings:

1. Moby Dick by Herman Melville, Ch. 55-75  (GBWW Vol. 48, pp. 120-154)
2. “First Inaugural Address” by Abraham Lincoln (GGB Vol. 6, pp. 747-755)
3. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding by David Hume, Sections X-XII (GBWW Vol. 33, pp. 488-509)
4. Federalist #84-85 (GBWW Vol. 40, pp. 251-259)
5. On the Loadstone and Magnetic Bodies by William Gilbert, Book IV (GBWW Vol. 26, pp. 77-91)
6. The Politics of Aristotle, Book IV (GBWW Vol. 8, pp. 487-502)

(Y1 W48) Call Me Skeptical

Hope everyone had a happy Thanksgiving last week. I was actually put back a bit on the workload, so this is getting out a bit later this week.  We're continuously chipping of more and more of the Gateway set and I'm noticing that I only have one Gateway book on my shelf each week. That's progress, I suppose. 

Moby Dick - Herman Melville, Ch. 23-39: We get a rundown of the major people on the boat: Bulkington (whom we met earlier) at the helm, Starbuck the chief mate is practical. Stubb the second mate is happy-go-lucky. Flask the third mate is "pugnacious concerning whales". Aside from Queequeg the other harpooners are Tashtego - an Indian, and Dagoo - an African. Ahab appears on deck - scarred on the face and sporting a whale jawbone for a leg. Ishmael gives an overview of cetology (whales), sperm whales are the most prized and fiercest. Ahab is fierce too and all respect him. One day, he offers a gold coin to whoever bags a white whale that Tashtego calls Moby Dick. He says that's why they're on the voyage. Starbuck thinks he's mad and is afraid. Ahab drinks with the men and solidifies the mission. Wow, a major digression with the "cetology" section. Great intro for Ahab and setup for his arc: "Talk not to me of blasphemy, man; I'd strike the sun if it insulted me." Some great Wrath of Khan quotes as well!

The Power Within Us - Haniel Long: Story adapted from a letter by conquistador Nunez Cabaca to Spanish King when they walked to Mexico City eight years after their failed mission in Florida. Led into disaster by pompous captain searching for "another Tenochtitlan, which ("Apalachee") turned out to be a poor swamp settlement. Tried to make boats and sail for Cuba. Failed, most died. Local Indians help by offering food, but want them to heal them in return. As a last resort they pray for the sick people and find them being healed. They begin making their way west/south, healing all the while when he finally begins to look at Indians as fellow human beings. In Mexico, they encounter other Spaniards who want to enslave their Indian companions. When they resist, the Indians are told that real Christians are those on horseback while their companions are not real Christians because they have "no luck and little heart". Indians say they prefer the fake Christians who are generous to the "real" ones who only want to steal. Nunez sees himself eight years earlier in the slavers. Great notion of "charity" that yet falls hopelessly short of Christianity. You don't see in these Spanish conquistadors any notion of Christ or Christianity at all; it's as if they are completely illiterate of both though they've heard rumors of the names. Even the idea of charity was to them self-discovered by mere accident.

An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding - David Hume, Sect. IV-VII: All issues of matter of fact rest on the notion of cause and effect, but those ideas come from experience alone, not a priori knowledge. Fundamental causes are totally outside our grasp. He's skeptical, therefore, about applying causes of events to like or future events. Predictions must then be only probable. We never know if "the course of nature" will change. The everyday method of navigation these difficulties is called Custom or Habit. "All inferences from experience, therefore, are effects of custom, not of reasoning." All beliefs are either memories or memories conjoined to "some other object". The difference between fiction and belief in a person's mind is in sentiment. It is an instinct given by nature to help us in life without our realizing it. Outside of math, everything is ambiguous. Our minds themselves are quite limited. Seems we can know only that one event follows another, "all events seem entirely loose and separate". We connect them only by habit. It's a scary thing to start from yourself - you don't get very far. Makes sense why some later folks (Plantinga) brought teleology back into it.

Federalist Papers #80, 81 - Alexander Hamilton: 80) Proper object of the judiciary? Five types: 1) issues of constitutionality of laws; 2) execution of provisions in Union articles; 3) cases where US are a party; 4) those involving the Peace of the Confederacy; 5) those on the high seas or where the States can't be impartial. These perfect the judiciary branch as a part of the whole system. 81) What about partitioning this authority to different subsidiary courts? There are no possibilities of intermixing powers with the legislative or with the judiciary ruling over them. Subsidiary courts will reside in districts chosen by Congress. Supreme Court has original jurisdiction only "in cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a State shall be a party". Everywhere else it only has an appellant jurisdiction. Their decisions won't override rulings of earlier courts, though they will rely on them. It's an interesting mix of power the Supreme Court has. It's mainly an appellant court as the final interpreter and spokesman for the Constitution, though it has original jurisdiction in these odd high-profile cases.

On the Loadstone - William Gilbert, Book II, Ch. 8-39: Desctiptions of meridians, equators of loadstones in comparisons to the earth. Earth, by its magnetic force, is made to revolve around its poles. The "chord" of pull by a magnet on a rod is longer as it approaches the pole. Magnetic forces travel through bodies, unlike electrical action of amber, etc. Tides show whole mass of earth cannot stop the "magnetic" pull of the moon. Various observations on stacking magnets and iron bodies and their combined pull. The center of a "terrella" (spherical magnet) is the center of force. "Ordering" force of magnets precedes the coition force. No perpetual motion machine made of magnets is possible. I need to not read this as a sloppy systematic presentation, but rather as a collection of observations loosely tied under a theme. Boy, is he pugnacious. Put him in a room with Hamilton (or Flask), give them something to disagree about, and only one will come out alive.

Politics - Aristotle, Book II: What is the best form of a political community? Communities can share: 1) all; 2) nothing; 3) mix of things; 2) is impossible. Socrates Republic is wrought with problems. Principle of "compensation" (all should participate) is the salvation of states. If "all" was shared, people would neglect responsibility, lose love of "their own", lose ability/virtue of giving. Property should be generally private; people will keep to their own business then. Selfishness is the viceful excess of self-interest. Socrates also had problems in the Laws. Other constitutions are considered. Men always want more - how to curb their appetites? "Beginning of reform is...to train the nobler sort of natures not to desire, and to prevent the lower from getting more." Lacedaemonian, Cretan, Carthaginian governments similar, all subject to corruption/bribery. Lacedaemonian had only one real virtue - virtue of soldier. Carthagians concerned with both merit and wealth. Penetrating criticism. It's good that he suggested alternatives as well; also good that much of that criticism was showing the unintended consequences of laws.

Here's this week's readings:

1. Moby Dick by Herman Melville, Ch. 40-54  (GBWW Vol. 48, pp. 78-120)
2. “Farewell Address” by George Washington (GGB Vol. 6, pp. 484-497)
3. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding by David Hume, Sections VIII-IX (GBWW Vol. 33, pp. 478-488)
4. Federalist #82-83 (GBWW Vol. 40, pp. 242-251)
5. On the Loadstone and Magnetic Bodies by William Gilbert, Book III (GBWW Vol. 26, pp. 60-76)
6. The Politics of Aristotle, Book III (GBWW Vol. 8, pp. 471-487)

(Y1 W47) A Drive-by by Edmund Burke

Happy Thanksgiving (or rather, Happy Black Friday, if it's been sainted into the ranks of a national holiday yet). We're starting two new authors this round - Aristotle and Hume. This will be the first and last of the Hume writings from the GBWW. Not so with Aristotle, not by a long shot. Keep in mind that one of these guys is way favored in the intellectual world today, while the other is way not. I'll let you figure out which is which.



Moby Dick - Herman Melville, Ch. 16-22: Ishmael seeks out a whaling ship for the two and comes to the Pequod. He talks with Captains Peleg and Bildad - part-owners of the boat, but not the ones to command her - and they accept him as a low-paying crewman. Captain Ahab will command, but he's sick now. Ishmael brings Queequeg by the next day. They don't like him because he's a cannibal and want him to become a Christian first. Ishmael says he's a born member of the "first Congregational Church"...of humanity. Peleg likes that and hires Queequeg on for a hefty pay because of his experience harpooning. Old "beggar-like" man, Elijah, warns them to find out about Ahab first. They ignore him. The ship is fixed up, the two go aboard early in the morning of departure, finding that Ahab came aboard last night but remains in his cabin. Rest of crew board. Peleg and Bildad order everyone around and cast off - no Ahab yet. When out at sea, the two disembark to another ship and wish them the best.  Ahab is still unseen. Very symbolic, especially with characters like Elijah "the prophet". Wonderful coupling the profundity of the Quaker language with the subject matter (more of that to come). There's still murkiness in his presentation of the religious side of the men, perhaps explained by statements like: "very probably he had long since come to the sage and sensible conclusion that a man's religion is one thing and this practical world quite another".


Letter to the Sheriffs of Bristol - Edmund Burke: As a member of the British Parliment, he's writing about the last two acts passed concerning the war with America. He's grieved that the legislation "subverts the liberties of our brethren". Making American ships "pirates" is more dishonorable than making them traitors. Suspension of habeas corpus for some is worse than full suspension for all because latter wouldn't be stood for. Those calling for war "have all the merits of volunteers, without risk of person or charge of contribution...It is our business to counteract them". People won't submit without feeling a "great affection and benevolence toward them" by the sovereign, which we aren't giving America. In two bonded communities, the greater is always the threat. Beware unintended consequences. The end of government is the happiness of the people. If we are to last we must reconcile our "strong presiding power" with liberty. "Among a people generally corrupt liberty cannot long exist." Very Lockeian in the ends and limits of government, very Montaigneian in its temperance/admission of ignorance. Too bad we didn't get any more (or a response by his adversaries).

An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding - David Hume, Sect. I-III: "Man is a reasonable being...but so narrow are the bounds of human understanding." We need both the accuracy of thinking and the beauty of sentiment. Much of metaphysics doesn't qualify as a discipline of study because of its obscurity. We must accept defeat here and "submit to this fatigue, in order to live at ease ever after". We need to subvert these abstruse philosophies with accurate and just reasoning, "and if we can go no farther than this mental geography...it is at least a satisfaction to go so far". But maybe we can discover more. Perceptions (impressions from our senses) are "lively", later memories of them (thoughts/ideas) are always less so. Analyzing our thoughts, we find all are derived from impressions, even the idea of God, there are therefore no innate ideas. There's always a connection between ideas in one of three ways: resemblance, contiguity, cause/effect. It's interesting to note that, at least for now, he's simply asserting that there's no innate ideas. Why couldn't one simply assert the opposite and land on equally shaky ground? Just because ideas might be conjoined from memories/impressions doesn't mean they were, and even if they were that doesn't mean they're false. One scientific way to get at this is through child psychology - and I know they've found some pretty remarkable suggestions of basic ideas in infants as young as a few months old ("objects shouldn't pass through each other, but collide", for example). It'll be good to get more into this, especially since many believe Hume is the major influencer in contemporary philosophy.

Federalist Papers #78-79 - Alexander Hamilton: 78) Now proceed to the judicial department. We're seeking to improve previous errors in 1) mode of appointment; 2) judges' tenure; 3) judicial authority. Judges "are to hold their offices during good behavior". It is the weakest of the three branches and holds neither "the purse" nor "the sword", therefore it's in "continual jeopardy of being overpowered". Need complete independence of judiciary if it is to act to limit government actions according to the Constitution, of which they are an extension. Thus they are the people acting to limit the delegates of the people (legislative). Permanent appointments grants judges independence. Few will qualify for the job. 79) Need a "fixed provision for their support" to ensure their independence. Their salaries can't be diminished during their terms, but can be raised because they won't be corrupted by that because they already have permanent tenures. They can be impeached by the House and tried by the Senate. Seems to imply he's only talking about the Supreme Court. I suppose subsidiary courts will come next. He also seems to have no concept of the "living document" method of Constitutional interpretation that is currently in vogue. Interesting.

On the Loadstone - William Gilbert, Book II, Ch. 1-7:  There are five types of magnetic movements: coition (attraction), direction, variation, declination, revolution - but now we're only talking about the first. There's a difference between the magnetic attraction of a loadstone and the electrical attraction of amber (and other stones when rubbed). Electrical attraction comes from humours trapped inside. "Loadstone attracts only magnetic bodies; electric attracts everything." Electric bodies "give" something to each other without touching and water enhances this. Magnets attract because of their "formal efficiencies or rather by primal native strength", not from primal emanations. Magnetic strength comes from outside and inside. Fire destroys this "form" of loadstone by "confusing" it, then it later is restored when cooled. "Poles are dominate in virtue of the force of the whole." Force always pulls (even internally) to the poles - right line at the poles, oblique elsewhere. This pull exerts equidistant around stone in all directions. Again, not the most concise. Interesting about amber - especially the theory of its origins: we find it on the beach so it must come from the sea - it has insects because it washed up once, trapped them, then out and back again. Distinguishing magnets from sources of static electricity seems a great place to start.

Politics - Aristotle, Book I: Mankind always seeks what they think is good; political communities seek the highest good. Government started from families, but is different in kind from families. Only man seeks morality, government. The state is prior to the family as the whole is prior to the parts. Justice is the bond of the state. Household management involves slaves and freemen - need property and "art of getting wealth". Slave is a living possession, belongs to another man by nature. Man naturally has superiors/inferiors and superiors naturally rule (i.e. slavery is "both expedient and right"). Rule over slaves is monarchy, over freemen constitutional rule. Art of household management is limited by needs of household; it's not the same as wealth-getting, which is limitless and guided by men's limitless greed. Retail trade/bartering is unnatural use of objects (i.e. shoes, which are made for feet, not exchange). Some trade is necessary, too much bad. Objects are too heavy to carry around so people coined objects of "intrinsic value" like iron, silver, etc. Father's rule over children is royal, over wife constitutional. All, including women, children, slaves, can be virtuous, but only freemen fully. Slave only virtuous in things that prevent him from failing in his duty. Amazing example of taking what existed (i.e. life in the ancient world), assuming it's normal, then applying a deductive teleological method to explain it all. Not very popular today (the latter really, not the former). The main problem, as I see it, is his assumption that the world he was seeking to explain was "normal" (as opposed to abnormal). If man is morally fallen, then entire social structures are going to be the product of that sin (i.e. slavery, the need for the state in the first place, etc.).

Here's next week's readings:

1. Moby Dick by Herman Melville, Ch. 23-39  (GBWW Vol. 48, pp. 48-77)
2. “The Power Within Us” by Haniel Long (GGB Vol. 6, pp. 246-261)
3. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding by David Hume, Sections IV-VII (GBWW Vol. 33, pp. 458-478)
4. Federalist #80-81 (GBWW Vol. 40, pp. 234-242)
5. On the Loadstone and Magnetic Bodies by William Gilbert, Book II, Chapters 8-39 (GBWW Vol. 26, pp. 43-59)
6. The Politics of Aristotle, Book II (GBWW Vol. 8, pp. 455-471)

(Y1 W46) Call Me Ishmael

We get to finish another volume this week, this time it's the tenth volume of the GGB set (philosophy). Not to fear, there's still lots left in the big set. Whew!

Moby Dick - Herman Melville, Ch. 1-15: When Ishmael gets depressed, he goes to sea. He arrives in New Bedford and stays at the Spouter Inn, but the only bed available is one he can share with a harpooner. When he's in bed the harpooner comes in and Ishmael realizes he's a savage from the south Pacific - Queequeg's his name. He stays anyway (reluctantly) and goes to a local church the next morning (Queequeg's there also) where he hears a sermon on Jonah and the whale - highlighting the sin of all men and the responsibilities of the shepherds of God's people. Ishmael soon becomes good friends with Queequeg, sharing his pagan rituals with him because it's what Jesus would want. Queequeg tells how he was a prince on his island but stole aboard a passing ship because he wanted to see Christendom and learn its ways to benefit his people. When he sees how horrible the sailors act, he doesn't want anything more to do with Christianity. He goes with Ishmael aboard a ship to Nantucket when a sailor (angered at Queequeg) goes overboard. Queequeg dives in and saves him. They arrive in Nantucket and stay at an inn run by the last inn-keeper's cousin. Beautifully written. Flows better (I think) than Billy Budd. I'm trying to figure out what he's saying about Christianity. The sermon painted it in a favorable light, then everything with Queequeg (and Ishmael's responses) went the other direction. I'm wondering if the Jonah sermon is going to come back later.

Fabius and Pericles Compared - Plutarch: Pericles ruled in a time of peace and prosperity, Fabius in the most difficult of times. Pericles built and adorned, Fabius held up. Fabius had "strength of purpose more than ordinary". Pericles won more battles, but no action can be compared to Fabius' rescue of Minucius. Fabius was outstretched by Hannibal, Pericles had no such rival. Pericles had greater foresight of failure than Fabius. Both were unyielding to enemies. Pericles had an incorruptible nature, Fabius ransomed his troops with his own money. Pericles erected more great structures than Rome ever has. Good comparison as far as one can, it seems. Again, where's Hannibal?

The Energies of Man - William James: There's something real, but unexplainable in the idea of a "second wind". We all have untapped energy ("power") deposits that come out upon meeting with certain stimuli. Maximizing our everyday energy is a personal and national goal. Main questions: "1) What are the limits of human faculty in various directions? 2) By what diversity of means...may the faculties be stimulated to their best results?" Most people only use a fraction of their power habitually. "Habit neurosis" makes us stop activities. Stimuli to overcome this includes excitements, ideas, efforts. Certain ascetic practices (like Yoga) can habitually train us to use more of our power. You see early glimpses of things as diverse as the self-help movement and evolutionary psychology here. It is an interesting and worthwhile observation about "maximizing our potentials". It's also odd to see that even as early as the late 19th century, the intelligentsia is already running past naturalism to mysticism. Would they say that the mystic practices suggested fit comfortably into a naturalistic worldview...as natural phenomena?

Federalist Papers #75-77 - Alexander Hamilton: 75) The power to make treaties (executive with the advice and consent of the Senate) falls under neither the executive nor the Senate's stated duties - so, this combined approach is best. If the Senate has the power alone, the executive is taken out of foreign negotiations. The nature of treaties is better suited to one man, not a group. 76) If nominations of ambassadors, judges, etc. were left to the people it would be too much to ever get done. President wouldn't be tempted by bargaining in the way Senate members would be. Option for Senate to override executive is a good check on him. 77) Cooperation of appointments would give stability to administration. Changes due to new administration won't be so chaotic then. This setup restrains the executive, it doesn't give him extra power over the Senate. Another section exemplifying their concern for checks on potential corruption/incompetency.

On the Loadstone - William Gilbert, Preface and Book I: Not much known about the loadstone (magnet), though it's been consistently mentioned by philosophers since antiquity. Most of what they say is wrong, except for the mere fact of the magnet's attraction to iron. Magnets are dug up all over the world. A magnet has two poles by nature that are best discovered when the magnet is a sphere. The poles are north (N) and south (S), like those of the earth. The N of one attracts the S of another. Cut a magnet in half and a new N and S appear - each magnet retaining two poles. It attracts iron as well as smelted metal. Iron is the best, most available metal in the world. Iron can be magnetized, but can weakly attract other iron anyway. Most medical claims for magnets are wrong - except steel powder can serve as a "remedy in diseases arising from humour". Magnets and iron are one and the same thing. Earth is a giant magnet and spins in its orbit because of its magnetic properties. The magnet "contains the supreme excellencies of the globe". Good reasoning so far, even if his presentation is a bit pompous. Only a few experiments are given and the discussion isn't so dense...so far.

St. Thomas Aquinas - Henry Adams: He was born in 1226 or 1227 of Norman and Swabian families - "in him the two most energetic strains in Europe met". His Summa was never finished, like the Beauvais Cathedral. He was a Dominican who undertook to build a "Church Intellectual". He's been sainted and the Summa is now official Catholic doctrine. He built his new structure on Augustine and Aristotle. Said God must be concrete, not merely a human  thought, so He must be proved by the senses. Needed an "intelligent fixed motor" at the source of all things. At the foundation was evidence of design. God is Thought, Love actualized in the Trinity. God is the only real cause, no real secondary causes. A person is created anew - mind and matter at once; a fusion of unity/universal with multiplicity/individual. "The soul is measured by matter", thus angels are universals. What is man? Man is not an automaton. God is free before he acts. Society insists on both man's freedom and God's/reality's unity. Man not "free" in that he is unrestrained - lest he be God. Man "reflects" and thus acts as agent, but is impressed upon by God. God gives more "energy" (i.e. grace) to some. Hard not to call it pantheistic. Science itself seeks a pantheistic unity in its pursuit of unified principles. Thomas's work is reflected in the architecture of his day. Since then philosophy/theology has become disjointed by learning more about the complex world around us. I agree on the last part, but not necessarily on the cause. Like Santayana, Adams had complex and sometimes vague imagery. It makes one admire the lofty system Thomas created, but a bit cautious when you see the risks involved.

Here's this week's readings:

1. Moby Dick by Herman Melville, Ch. 16-22  (GBWW Vol. 48, pp. 31-48)
2. “Letter to the Sheriffs of Bristol” by Edmund Burke (GGB Vol. 7, pp. 237-271)
3. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding by David Hume, Sections I-III (GBWW Vol. 33, pp. 451-458)
4. Federalist #78-79 (GBWW Vol. 40, pp. 229-234)
5. On the Loadstone and Magnetic Bodies by William Gilbert, Book II, Chapters 1-7 (GBWW Vol. 26, pp. 26-43)
6. The Politics of Aristotle, Book I (GBWW Vol. 8, pp. 445-455)

(Y1 W45) Lives of the Noble Carthaginians?

Hi. Sorry I'm late this week. Here's another happy summary of readings from this past week. Feel free to let me know your thoughts.

The Merchant of Venice - William Shakespeare: Antonio - the merchant - backs a loan to his friend Bassanio from Shylock the Jew - a bitter rival of Antonio. Bassanio uses the money to court rich heiress, Portia, who loves him in return. The kicker: if Bassanio defaults, Shylock gets to take a pound of Antonio's flesh. Antonio's hears his ships have all wrecked and he can't back the loan. Bassanio passes the tests to win Portia and they marry, but Shylock doesn't want the money to be paid back by them - he wants Antonio's flesh. Portia dresses up like a judge at the trial before the Duke and points out that it's his right to have the pound, but he can't take a drop of blood...and Shylock's guilty of conspiracy to murder. His life is spared but he must give an inheritance to his runaway daughter. Portia takes Bassanio's wedding ring as payment, then later (dressed as herself) scolds him for giving away the ring. Antonio says he'll back another one as his ships have now come in and she reveals that she was the judge all along playing a trick on everyone. Ha-Ha-Ha. Shakespeare loves to play dress-up confusion. It's like Three's Company meets Scooby-Doo, except it's the good guys that take their masks off at the end, not the bad guys. I know this is a controversial play, but it seems like it didn't have to be. If he just made Shylock a run-of-the-mill Venetian rival to Antonio instead of a Jew, the story still works (mostly). I wonder how this played into the stereotypes of the Elizabethan British. It's a great exploration of justice and mercy at any rate.


Fabius - Plutarch: (c.270-203 B.C., Roman): Born of a distinguished family. He disciplined himself for war and public oration. Was five times consul. When Hannibal - the famous Carthaginian general - invaded Italy, his advice: taunt him, but don't engage him - he'll always win ("let the force and vigor of Hannibal waste away and expire"). Flaminius falls to Hannibal, Fabius chosen as dictator. He is criticized for his strategy and called a coward, but Hannibal understood it and sought to engage him. Fabius almost got him when he made a mistake and got himself into a compromised position, but he escaped at night with a clever plan of tying torches to cattle and stampeding them. Fabius' Roman rival gets an equal command with Fabius and leads a foolish attack against Hannibal. Fabius rescues him in a daring expedition and he repents and submits to Fabius. Varro attacks Hannibal, but is engulfed and wiped out by his half-moon formation. All this, but Hannibal refuses to attack Rome itself: "You know, Hannibal, how to gain a victory, but not how to use it" says his men (and history). Fabius has some more minor victories but opposes Scipio's plan to attack Carthage itself in Africa. Romans go with Scipio; he leaves and attacks with a small band, Hannibal recalled to Africa but is defeated by Scipio. Fabius dies a poor man before it's all over. Why wasn't this story entitled "Hannibal"? Fabius is fine, but clearly Hannibal's the star here. Was it a Roman prejudice or did Plutarch just want to stick with the Grecians and Romans? Again, we see here how Plutarch values moderation under stress.

The Study of Mathematics - Bertrand Russell: All activities deserve the question: "What is its purpose and ideal?" This is lost in the instruction of many subjects in favor of rote memorization - math included. Math "possesses not only truth, but supreme beauty - a beauty cold and austere". One chief aim in math instruction is to "awaken the learner's belief in reason" (gives his thoughts on teaching algebra, geometry, calculus). The idea of "unity in method and systematic development of a central theme" must be relayed, not getting bogged down in mere "curiosities". Symbolic logic of the nineteenth century gave more substantial underpinnings to mathematics. Math is not subjective, but reflects a reality outside our own minds, and is therefore a safeguard against skepticism. We're also independent of math as particulars are independent of generalities. Utility of math is secondary. Great pep talk for teachers to keep focus on why they're teaching math. Echos concerns of earlier writers we read about math as a means only, and the idea of the general vs. the particular.

Federalist Papers #70-74 - Alexander Hamilton: 70) A feeble executive means feeble execution. What are the ingredients that make up the executive's vigor? Need unity - can't have sharing of the office or subjecting it under another branch/group. This would destroy both noble aspirations and accountability. 71) Executive needs duration of his term to enact agendas. Short duration would make him dependent on the whims of the people and be a weak counterpoint to the legislative. 72) Administration of government mostly comes down to the executive branch. If executive's office is short-lived, so are the terms of all the administrators he appoints, which would be chaotic. Don't want to lose their experiences either. 73) Legislature has no power over a current executive's salary, etc. He also has a veto power over their bills. 74) War, of all things, needs a single commander-in-chief. Pardons "should be as little as possible fettered or embarrassed" because responsibility is largest "in proportion as it is undivided". The style of the age sometimes gets wordy, but this is good reasoning. I see a great and continuous emphasis on the fact that anyone can become corrupted. I do wonder that if the Constitution was written today this would be lost on people who primarily are thinking about limiting the opportunities of their culture-war adversaries.

Motion of the Heart - William Harvey, Ch. XII-XVII: XII) Arteries don't receive blood from veins. Blood flows in continuous cycle to all extremities. People faint from blocked blood flow. XIII) Valves exist in veins, but not in arteries. They open in one direction and have two parts that meet in the middle. They're there to let blood flow only from greater to lesser veins - they help veins bring blood to the heart. XIV) It's necessary to conclude that blood circulates by means of the pulse - "sole and only end of the motion and contraction of the heart". XV) Heart is the "principle of life". It brings nutrition, "energy", and heat to the extremities. XVI) Poisons, bites, etc. pass throughout body by circulating blood as do topical applications. Returning blood also carries impurities to the liver. XVII) Not all animals have a heart, larger ones do to propel blood. Fibrous bands are within the heart that help it contract - called "neurons" by Aristotle ("contracting elements"). Their strength and density varies greatly in people, but is always stronger on the left. Arteries differ from veins in thickness so they can sustain the shock of the pulse. Heart and lungs are the "storehouse and the workshop of the (blood's) last perfection". Given that last point, he never really got to the function of the lungs. He constantly exhibits a trust in the existence of a function for everything - "thus nature, ever perfect and divine, doing nothing in vain". How crucial was that to his studies and wherever did he get this idea from?

Protagoras - Plato: Socrates recounts a conversation with the sophist, Protagoras. He visits a friend's house, whom Protagoras is going to instruct, and asks Protagoras if virtue can be taught, thinking himself that it can't. Protagoras gives the myth of Prometheus as the origin of both fire and the mechanical arts, but Zeus kept political wisdom for himself.  He did give everyone "reverence and justice" to order the cities so it can be taught by everyone, like language. Socrates asks whether virtue is a whole - of which justice, temperance, holiness are only parts - or whether they're just different names for the same thing. He answers that they are parts to a whole like the parts of a face - five there are, but only four are similar to each other and the fifth (courage) is different because a bad person can be courageous in evil. Socrates shows evil people can't be courageous - only the virtuous, and that is based on knowledge. And because it's based on knowledge, virtue can be taught. To my modern eye, this one was sorely in need of an editor's scalpel, mostly where the "rules of the discussion" dragged on. It is interesting how cordial, yet tense the conversation was. So, people are viceful because of ignorance. What if someone just doesn't want to be virtuous? What if they're happy with their viceful pleasure, no matter how ignorant you (Socrates) tell them they are?

Here's next week's readings:

1. Moby Dick by Herman Melville, Ch. 1-15  (GBWW Vol. 48, pp. 1-31)
2. “Fabius and Pericles Compared” by Plutarch (GBWW Vol. 13, pp. 154-155)
3. “The Energies of Men” by William James (GGB Vol. 7, pp. 157-170)
4. Federalist #75-77 (GBWW Vol. 40, pp. 222-229)
5. On the Loadstone and Magnetic Bodies by William Gilbert, Preface and Book I (GBWW Vol. 26, pp. 1-25)
6. “Thomas Aquinas” by Henry Adams (GGB Vol. 10, pp. 422-461)

(Y1 W44) Separation of Church (Authority) and State (Authority)

The Lifted Veil - George Eliot: An old man predicts his upcoming death and looks back over his life. Was a second child, unloved by his father who didn't understand his sensitive nature. But he was a "poet without a poet's voice". Visited in school by his father when he starts having visions of things to come, including meeting a young girl. He later meets the girl - Bertha - and faints. She is the neighbor's niece who is expected to be engaged to his brother. The boy becomes infatuated with her though, partly because she's the only one whose mind he can't read (literally). She doesn't help much by frequently (sarcastically) flirting with him. He then has a vision of a "moment of hell" where they're married in the future and she hates him. His brother dies and he ends up marrying her. He stays "in her power" because he can't see beyond "the veil" to read her mind, always imagining it to be something of great depth. Later the veil is lifted and he sees into her mind that "the darkness had hidden no landscape from [me], but only a blank prosaic wall"; yep, she really is a horrible person. They slowly grow apart. When their maid lays dying she reveals Bertha was planning to kill him. They've since lived separately. Beautiful writing; horrible people! I wasn't quite as shocked by the ending as maybe Eliot's contemporary readers might have been. Here's a lesson to young men overly taken with a pretty face: if anyone ever says something like, "a little quiet contempt contributes greatly to the elegance of life," RUN! Don't stop to try and figure it out (same goes for the girls).

Pericles - Plutarch: We want to study great men because they teach us virtue. Pericles born of the noblest birth on both sides around the time of the Persian wars. Early on given "weight" and elevated in Athens by Anaxagoras. Some say he was pompous. He joined the "party of the people" and then intentionally became aloof because "in intimate familiarity an exterior of gravity is hard to maintain". Superior orator, out-spoke Thucydides. Rivalry with him and Cimon that later balanced Athens' two parties: party of the People and party of the Few. He "let loose the reins of the people" so they would like him and later sent Athenians out to colonize to "discharge the city of an idle...busy, meddling crowd". He built great public buildings and works amid accusations. Finally threw out his rival, Thucydides, and held all power. Then he became more strict. He had a "manifest freedom from every kind of corruption". Tensions rose with Lacedaemonians. Pericles had success in war but wouldn't let it become lust for Athenian foreign conquests. Peloponnesian war broke out after he conquered the Samians, largely because of Pericles. Lacedaemonians invade Athenian territory. Pericles waits, then sends fleet to Peloponnese and attacks. Plague takes Athens, and elsewhere. Athenians oust Pericles and later want him back. The plague gets him too. People praised him for his moderation, purity in stressful times, "'for', said he, 'no Athenian, through my means, ever wore mourning'". This bio was much more subtle and intricate than previous ones we've read from Plutarch. One common character lesson Plutarch has emphasized is the ability to stay calm and principled in incredibly stressful times. Knowing it's a virtue is easy, but being able to actually pull it off can get you a spot in Plutarch's hall of fame.

A Letter Concerning Toleration - John Locke: Specifically, the letter addresses "mutual toleration of Christians in their different professions of religion", which is, to him, the true mark of a church. True religion is about "regulating of men's lives according to the rules of virtue and piety...[men] make war upon [their] own lusts and vices". It is a mistake, therefore, to persecute in the name of religion. "I esteem it above all things necessary to distinguish exactly the business of civil government from that of religion and to settle the just bounds that lie between the one and the other." Civil government is about outward things, specifically protection of property and civil rights; "religion consists in the inward persuasion of the mind". Church is a free and and voluntary society for the public worship of God and the salvation of souls. Nobody is born a member of a church. Churches are free to make/enforce their own laws, which should only concern the two ends of worship and salvation, so force is never needed. The Christian church is supposed to be persecuted, not do the persecuting. The church therefore is utterly distinct from the government as any voluntary association is. There is nowhere for rulers to appeal to for "authoritative" interpretations of Christianity. Church rites that violate civil laws are already illegal, all else should stay legal. Israel was a special case because God himself was the ruler. Government can't inhibit preaching if no civil rights violated. What of laws that force you to violate your conscience? Obey your conscience always. Jews, Muslims, Pagans to be tolerated, but not atheists because God is the basis of all contracts, etc. Not being tolerant of other religious viewpoints is what caused the religious wars, not the diversity of opinion. Heresy is separation made over something not explicitly in the Scriptures. Schism is separation based on worship practice. (Mostly) great display of religious toleration and what lead to the idea in the West. It's not an accident that it's a Protestant with a Calvinist background that is writing this. He's talking about a distinction between the sphere of church authority and the sphere of state authority. Modern secularists can mistakenly read him as making a distinction between "Christianity in toto" and "the secular state" (which, reading what he says about atheists should dispel, though it's shocking for different reasons!). He's quite (and admirably) consistent with our earlier readings of his on state from a few weeks ago, but his methodology implies that the bible has no input on the operations of the state, which it does. His heresy definition seems way too strict - anyone leaving one church for another would be a heretic! 

Federalist Papers #67-69 - Alexander Hamilton: 67) Executive branch has received great criticism likening it to the British monarchy. One complaint is that the president appoints stand-in senators during recesses. But these appointments expire at the end of their next session. The president's ordinary powers of appointments are shared with the Senate. 68) The means by which the president is himself appointed to office is the least criticized. The people of the various states choose their own electors. Candidate with majority of votes is president. VP chosen in the same way. 69) Characteristics of the executive. Single man elected for 4 years, open to being re-elected ad infinitum. He can be impeached, removed, punished (unlike British king). Is limited in influencing bills, military, granting pardons. He can receive ambassadors, appoints both them and judges, but only jointly with Senate. He possesses "more or less power than the governor of New York" does. And "there is no pretense for the parallel...between him and the king of Great Britain". Reading this you can see them starting with monarchy as a model for the presidency, then limiting it where they saw abuse. Other changes from what's defended here include means of election and limitations on president/VP terms.

Motions of the Heart - William Harvey, Ch. VI-XI: VI) Most anatomists restrict their investigations to deceased humans. Had they worked with live animals, these matters would be cleared up. The fetal heart is different from the adult. VII) Consumed water passes through the liver, kidneys, bladder without a "pulse" pushing it. Valves in the heart prevent two-way passage of blood. VIII) Here's a novel idea concerning the quantity of blood, though it may be unpopular: blood is not ever-generated anew, it circulates and recycles "to recover its state of excellence or perfection". Arteries carry blood from the heart to the body, veins actually bring it back to the heart (contrary to what's currently thought). IX) He calculates that the amount of blood pumped by the heart in a given time far exceeds the input needed to make the blood. The standing amount of blood in a body can be demonstrated by how fast butchers can drain blood from animals. The heart keeps pumping blood after the lungs fail in a dying person, which is why you see air in the arteries after death. X) One can initiate two kinds of death in a snake heart: "extinction from deficiency (of blood) and suffocation from excess". XI) Ligatures (tourniquets) can be used to demonstrate the prevention of circulation in animals and humans. Such a basic observation overlooked because everyone was looking at only one species (human) and thus only one state (deceased), as opposed to live animals. Surely the car's engine looks different after it's broken than when it works. I enjoy this, but parts make me queasy!

On the Nature of Things - Lucretius, Book VI: We must be rid of the fear of sickness and death by "the aspect and laws of nature". Thunder comes from clouds through seeds of fire from the sun; all things are heated by motion. Thunderbolts consist of "small and smooth elements" that "break or pull the knots and untie the bonds of union". They don't come from gods. Clouds form by aggregates and mix with water, releasing rain caused by wind or their own density. Earthquakes come from "air gathering" in subterranean caverns. Volcanoes come from wind and air heating rocks in mountains. The Nile rises and falls from winds or excessive rains. Hot springs and toxic lakes come from noxious seeds. Magnetism works by opening a void between "magnetic rock" and metal, through which the metal is pulled/pushed. Disease comes from "seeds...conducing to disease and death" that rise up in clouds and blow away, therefore varying between climates. Plague can be so harassing that we forget about the gods. He seemed to peter out at the end. I guess it wasn't the bang I was expecting.

Here's next week's readings:

1. The Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare  (GBWW Vol. 24, pp. 406-433)
2. “Fabius” by Plutarch (GBWW Vol. 13, pp. 141-154)
3. “The Study of Mathematics” by Bertrand Russell (GGB Vol. 9, pp. 84-94)
4. Federalist #70-74 (GBWW Vol. 40, pp. 210-222)
5. An Anatomical Disquisition on the Motion of the Heart and Blood in Animals by William Harvey, Chapters XII-XVII (GBWW Vol. 26, pp. 292-304)
6. Protagoras by Plato (GBWW Vol. 6, pp. 38-64)

(Y1 W43) Beware silver bullets and your own conscience

Okay, as promised I'm posting earlier this week.  So be of good cheer.  I hope you're having as happy a time reading as I am.  Personally, I find the variety of reading each week to be a joy in itself. 

The Emperor Jones - Eugene O'Neill: Setting is a Caribbean island "dictatorship" run by former U.S. prisoner Brutus Jones - "Emperor" Jones. His black "subjects" have run off into the hills (a gesture of rebellion) and Jones is informed of it by white cockney trader, Smithers. The two dialog about the thugish situation of the island, Jones' "rule", and how he came to have it through an earlier rebellion. Jones makes his escape through the woods for the island's far shore, relying on his preplanned escape path and gun and silver bullet - both a luck charm and the "one thing" that can kill him. He enters the imposing forest at dusk, can't find his buried food cans and starts seeing haunting visions: a man he killed, a prison chain gang forcing him to work, an old-time slave auctioneer trying to sell him. He disperses them with shots of his lead bullets while his subjects' distant beating drum gets louder and louder. His last vision is a witch doctor who calls up the crocodile and motions for Jones to serve as its sacrifice. Jones fires his last bullet (silver one) at it. Both disappear images. The next morning, the rebels walk just inside the woods and shoot Jones dead with silver bullets of their own that they made the previous night as they cast spells. This was probably one of the strangest things we've read so far. It read less like a story than a philosophical treatise put to fictional events. Yet, it was a great display of the evil and stubbornness man is capable of, and how when pushed, an evil man is willing to use any means to meet his own ends, while still being undone in the end by his own guilt. On another note, it was a great display of written accents.

A Plea for Captain John Brown - Henry David Thoreau: Followup statement on behalf of John Brown after his failed attempt to start a slave uprising at Harper's Ferry in 1859. Thoreau knows John Brown only a little, but wants to defend him against the condemning opinions of newspapers. He had courage greater than a soldier - he was willing to face his own country when she was wrong. He had so few compatriots because he had such high standards. His plan was a good one, but people criticized it because it failed, wouldn't have if it succeeded. He is the seed of heroism; "when you plant, or bury, a hero in his field, a crop of heroes is sure to spring up". So many who call themselves Christian are lazy and cowardly, unlike him. Newspapers omitted any noble statements about him and replaced them with insults. Unjust government shows itself to be mere "brute force": "a government that pretends to be Christian and crucifies a million Christs every day!" Brown teaches us how to die because he teaches us how to live. His "insanity" so-called was more like a "spark of divinity". He pleads not for Brown's life, but his character..."so it becomes your cause wholly". Thoreau seems to display the full vent of a passion for justice that we can feel at various times in life, but it seems unlivable in reality. Lincoln distanced himself from Brown, unapologetically. But was Brown at least a kind of inspiration for men like Lincoln, as Thoreau suggested he could be? Were Brown and Thoreau wrong? Did Lincoln only distance himself from them for because he thought the political avenue was the only way to lasting change on the issue of slavery?

Letter to Herodotus - Epicurus: Writing to friend (no, not that Herodotus) and giving a basic distilling of his overall system. We must "keep all our investigations in accord with our sensations". The universe is an external, boundless "closed box" composed of only "atoms" and space, outside of which is nothing. Basic bodies are indivisible, can form limitless numbers of compounds but are themselves limited in number. They're always moving and form infinite worlds like ours. "Idols" (images) are emitted from them, stored as memories that can be confused together in people's minds causing error. Space is infinite. The soul is the material force driving the body. The heavens are not controlled or ordained by any gods. Science facts lead to our happiness because they dispel fear of the natural world. Man's main problem is believing in gods that are malevolent towards us, "but peace of mind is being delivered from all this." Learn and memorize these facts and they'll do you good. Boy, now I'm even less impressed with Lucretius. I knew he was drawing on Epicurus for his source material, but I didn't know he was just copying him jot and tittle like that. On a whole, it does seem that his (Epicurus') "atomistic"/naturalistic view of the world is a kind of logical solution to the problems presented by ancient Greco-Roman paganism in the way that Buddhism is the solution to the problems of Hinduism. That is, it makes most sense as a reaction, and not so much as a stand-alone system. Just an observation.

Federalist Papers #66 - Hamilton: Review of objections against the Senate performing impeachments. 1) It "confounds legislative and judiciary authorities in the same body." But separation of powers maxim is compatible with special case intermixing, and necessary for securing branches against each other. 2) "It contributes to an undue accumulation of power in that body". Vague objection. House is a proper counterweight for it anyway. 3) They would be too lenient on those they've helped appoint. But, president chooses, they only ratify. 4) They wouldn't condemn themselves in cases of ruinous treaties they helped create. Security against this "is to be sought for in the numbers and characters of those who are to make them," it being a joint venture with the executive. It's "essential to the freedom and to the necessary independence of the deliberations of the body that the members of it be exempt from punishment for acts done in a collective capacity." I wonder about the point on collective guilt. Should there be no recourse to address the collective guilt of a political body like the Senate no matter how egregious the consequences of their actions?

An Anatomical Disquisition on the Motion of the Heart and Blood in Animals - William Harvey, Intro-Ch. V: Flowery introduction to King Charles I, then a more sober intro to his colleagues at the Royal College of Physicians. He starts by discussing previous opinions on the function of the heart. People think, with Galen, that the pulse and respiration have the same object, but this is wrong since one is related to the heart, the other to the lungs. Blood alone is carried in the arteries. I) He, like others, once thought only God could comprehend the issue, but then his experiments suggested an answer. II) Heart moves at one time and is still at another. This is an aid to pushing blood through when it contracts. III) All arteries of body pulsate via the contraction of the left ventricle. IV) Four motions involved: two auricles moving together, two ventricles doing the same afterwards. The first moves the blood into the ventricles. It's the auricles that are "first to live, last to die". V) After blood exits auricles, it enters ventricles. Contraction of right ventricle pushes blood into the lungs, left pushes blood into the aorta and the rest of the body - all performed harmoniously. Pulse is pushing of blood from the heart. The great point of confusion here is the fact that the heart and lungs are connected. Masterful experimental/observational reasoning, especially given their misunderstanding of how the air in the lungs could be connected with the blood (i.e. having no concept of modern chemical theory yet). It makes one wonder what such a person could do with more robust methods/background knowledge to draw from. Then again, it's folks like this that brought such advances around in the first place!

On the Nature of Things - Lucretius, Book V: He wants now to show the mortality of the world. Sun, moon, stars, etc. aren't divine bodies. Again, the world wasn't designed because it's not perfect. Both the heavens and the earth had a beginning and will have an end. Earth must have had a recent beginning, the brief history of man shows this. It came about by first-beginnings (particles) massing together. Streams of air cause the motions of the stars in the sky. Things in the sky are actually the size they appear to be. After the earth came plants, animals, then humans. Man used to be much stronger in constitution, but became weaker because of civilization. Before, we were like wild beasts and spoke language like animal sounds that later became more advanced. Fire first came from lightening. Men settled and made common laws because "grew sick of a life of brute force". We imagined the gods because the world was a scary place. Metals discovered, animals tamed. Clothing, farming, music learned from imitating nature. When better things came along, the earlier tools were cast aside. Development was inevitable for man. It's actually pretty impressive that he came up with an early version of the nebular hypothesis. It's ironic though that he's the naturalist defending a young earth against the supernaturalists that believed in an old earth. The progressivism of man seems to be spot on with current naturalism, though. I just had a random thought: this is a poem and all poems were sung (supposedly). It kind of cracks me up imagining Lucretius up on some stage stringing a harp and singing all this.


Here's this week's readings:

1. “The Lifted Veil” by George Eliot  (GGB Vol. 3, pp. 157-193)
2. “Pericles” by Plutarch (GBWW Vol. 13, pp. 121-141)
3. “A Letter Concerning Toleration” by John Locke (GBWW Vol. 33, pp. 1-22)
4. Federalist #67-69 (GBWW Vol. 40, pp. 203-210)
5. An Anatomical Disquisition on the Motion of the Heart and Blood in Animals by William Harvey, Chapters VI-XI (GBWW Vol. 26, pp. 280-292)
6. The Way Things Are (or On the Nature of Things) by Lucretius, Book VI (GBWW Vol. 11, pp. 77-91)

(Y1 W42) Dostoevsky Broke My Heart

Sorry this is coming at a later day this week. We've had quite a busy schedule, which will hopefully lighten up over the next couple of weeks. I'll try to put posts up earlier in the week then, I promise!


White Nights - Fyodor Dostoevsky:  A lonely young man has no real friends but is "friend" to all in St. Petersburg, in a way. Late one summer night ("white nights" refers to the near continuous sunlight that occurs during the mid-summer nights in this northern city), he sees a pretty girl all alone and crying. When a suspicious man walks by, the young man offers to escort her and she accepts. They become friends but she warns him not to fall in love with her. He relays how he's a lonely person who gets so caught up in his spontaneous fantasies he doesn't live a "real" life. She sympathizes, saying how her blind grandmother (with whom she lives) pins their dresses together when she misbehaves so she can't get away. Then she tells him about an older man who rented their attic room and how she fell in love with him, though he didn't return it. One year ago he was leaving, but when pushed by her he promised to return in one year and marry her. She had now been waiting for him for several nights, but he never came. The lonely young man helps her write a letter to Mr. Delinquent (to be delivered via some friends), then keeps waiting the next few nights with her for him to come, but he doesn't. When she despairs, the young man reveals that he's fallen love with her. Crying, she says, "well, I guess I love you too - why not?" and they start to plan their futures together. Then her mystery man actually shows up. She kisses the young man, then runs off with the mystery man. The young man later gets a letter in the mail: "Don't hate me. Can't we be friends?" But everything around him now looks old. He still wants the best for her, though, and wishes a moment of bliss could last forever. Dostoevsky, you broke my heart, you fiend! I shouldn't have fallen for it. I should have taken her advice in the beginning. I guess the American in me just needs a happy ending for the young man, too. Yet, maybe it's best to want the best for her as well. Wonderful verbalization of subtle psychological nuances.

The Character of Socrates - Xenophon: A personal recollection of Socrates. He always took pains to build up those around him. Wanted them to study things because of practical ends. Thought pursuits like trying to figure out the origin of the heavens and how they work couldn't be achieved and must displease the gods who wouldn't want us to pry into mysteries. Claims he was forewarned about his execution but welcomed it because of his old age. Saw his entire life as preparation for his trial. Their injustice would be a shame to them, not him. He was the most virtuous man one could aspire to be. Mostly consistent with the image of Socrates painted by Plato, except the comments on his affinity for divination.Wonderful eulogy. Something (mostly) to aspire to hear others say about you one day.

Second Treatise on Civil Government - John Locke, Ch. XVI - XIX: XVI) Conquest is never a substitute for consent, thus is never legitimate in itself. Conquerors never get power over other people's possessions and can't take away property from conquered man's family. All born with a double right: freedom, inheritance. There is, then, a right to rebel against an unjust conqueror. XVII) Usurper is never in the right without the people's consent. XVIII) King James (and Mel Gibson) said: tyrant thinks his kingdom is there for his pleasure; the righteous king thinks he's ordained to protect the property of his people. "Force is to be opposed to nothing but unjust and unlawful force." This principle hinders not the people but would-be tyrants. People can't pursue force if the grievance can repaired by an appeal to law. But force okay if "long train of acting show the counsels all tending that way" (i.e. the way of tyranny). XIX) Governments can be dissolved from within in several ways, leaving the people the opportunity to set up a new legislative because society has a right to preserve itself. This idea doesn't encourage rebellions more than any other ideas. Saying they can't ever rebel is like saying victims can't rebel against robbers. Even those believing in a divine right of kings agree a king can "un-king" himself when he becomes a tyrant. And here we come to the rub - the right of revolution. He's right in pointing out that agreement with the divine-righters on this issue is a mark in his favor. I actually think it gets much worse in that it's a lethal admission for the divine-right side: it admits people are the final earthly judges of proper authority.

Federalist Papers 64, 65 - Jay and Hamilton: 64) Why should the president have power to make treaties? Need the best qualified men to perform the task, and the manner most conducive to the public good. Office of president is best on both accounts. Secrecy will often be needed and a single person is better for that than larger bodies. Don't like that treaties have the force of law? Actions of judges and governors have the same weight. Treaties are also subject to amends and repeals. Corrupt treaties? "The idea is too gross and too invidious to be entertained." Nations would void such treaties anyway. 65) Should the Senate be in charge of impeachments? Impeachments will almost always divide the whole community, so need a "delicacy and magnitude of a trust" the Senate is most fit to fulfill. Who else could do it? Not Supreme Court or some third, non-governmental body. So, don't reject the Constitution because of imperfections; there won't ever be a perfect constitution. Looks good, mostly. But why wasn't the House considered for impeachments? Or how about governors? That may get into the impractical as well, though.

On Ancient Medicine - Hippocrates: Some think medicine proceeds under a single hypothesis of "hot, or cold, or moist, or dry, or whatever else they choose" as being the sole cause of disease. They are mistaken. Disease is primarily caused by diet. Humans have acquired a diet of "stronger" elements that are harmful. Those who first pursued medicine invented soups as remedies, which dilute and take these "stronger" elements out. Weaker diets are more beneficial. People's habits, constitutions differ in allowing what they can handle. Perfect diet is a mix of moderate elements, but things like temperature do affect us in different ways though. Remedies to ailments often involve "purging" aspect though, not heat/cold applications. Shapes of organs, etc. are also related to ailments. This is a great example of how one can have wacky ideas about phenomena that, in practice, have little affect on the phenomena. It seems that the theory ("strength" of diet) follows the result of tinkering with different diets as opposed to diet being predicted from some prior theory; this is tinkering, not science. In other words: diet affects health; no matter what bizarre theory you want to make up to explain it, it won't affect this basic observation for good or for ill. Kudos to Hippocrates and these old-time physicians, though, for working so hard with such limited methodologies. I wouldn't have the patience.

On the Nature of Things - Lucretius, Book IV: He teaches these things to save people from religion and puts the bitter message into sweet verse so they will swallow it down (hence the poetic form). Now he wants to look at "idols" (images) of things so we don't believe in ghosts or the afterlife. Pictures of things are emitted from their surfaces as thin layers of particles flung out in all directions at all times. Smells, sounds emitted in similar ways. Some of these experiences deceive you, but we must rely on sense data for knowledge so don't become a skeptic. The mind is impressed with these images and retains "thinner" versions as memories that can become confused (man image + horse image = centaur image). Organs came before their functions, so "shun the weakness" of believing they're designed. Images present themselves to the mind, the mind wills and affects the soul, the soul then acts throughout the body. Sleep comes when soul breaks down and part "withdraws to the inner recesses" of the body. Love is a wasteful, foolish trick of the body. "Venus mocks lovers with idols, nor can bodies satisfy them". Children are conceived of seeds mixed between parents and fertility is entirely natural, so praying for fertility is a waste of time. It's interesting, but just so much speculation (and more assertions against design). Not to be degrading, but it honestly sounds like a yarn my 4-year old would spin about how the world works, though a bit more fleshed out. That comes back to the limitation in biological/medical methodology again, I suppose. My real question, though, is who broke poor Lucretius' heart? I mean, he goes on for pages and pages about how horrible romantic love is. He's been reading Dostoevsky! The fiend.

If you're up for it, here's the readings for next week:

1. The Emperor Jones by Eugene O’Neill  (GGB Vol. 4, pp. 357-382)
2. “A Plea for Captain John Brown” by Henry David Thoreau (GGB Vol. 6, pp. 714-732)
3. “Letter to Herodotus” by Epicurus (GGB Vol. 10, pp. 216-229)
4. Federalist #66 (GBWW Vol. 40, pp. 200-203)
5. An Anatomical Disquisition on the Motion of the Heart and Blood in Animals by William Harvey, Introduction-Chapter V (GBWW Vol. 26, pp. 267-280)
6. The Way Things Are (or On the Nature of Things) by Lucretius, Book V (GBWW Vol. 11, pp. 58-77)