Nietzsche on Thales

Being a noob to this whole philosophy thing, I've only been exposed to only small out of context fragments of Nietzsche's work. I must say, after reading for this assignment, I'm absolutely blown away . Not only does he have brilliant thoughts, but in employing those thoughts, he uses some of the most powerful imagery I've come across. 

Philosophy In the Tragic Age of the Greeks is, more or less, a  historical and philosophical commentary by Nietzsche on figures and philosophies of the classic era. He begins by claiming that the ancient astronomer Thales proposition of a watery ἄρχε as the genesis of Greek philosophy. He asserts that no one before Thales had the belief that everything is connected. Even though Thales idea had some obvious flaws, he used his imagination and saw beyond observable evidence and personal experience. He then speaks about how using one's imagination to see beyond the plainly evident is a central tenant of philosophy. In much more eloquent words than my own Nietzsche says, "Philosophy leaps ahead on tiny  toeholds;  hope and intuition lend wings to its feet. Calculating  reason limbers  heavily  behind, 

looking for better footholds, for reason too wants to reach that alluring goal which its divine comrade  has long since reached." 

He later goes on to praise Thales on challenging the Greek notion that Man is the center of the universe. If everything is truly water, than Man cannot be the center of the universe because he is made of water and must take on a secondary role. 

Even though Nietzsche knows that water is not the ἄρχε he praises Thales for thinking it. I wonder if Nietzsche believes in an ἄρχε? And if so, what is it? And what does man have to do with it?

Zip it up and zip it out.

Sappho: A break from the traditional

When one normally thinks of historical figures of ancient Hellenic culture, usually one thinks of prominent Athenian men. Sappho is a refreshing break from traditional historical figures of ancient Greece. Not only was Sappho a women, she also was from Eastern Greece on the Isle of Lesbos, speaking an entire different dialect of Greek than renown poets such as Homer. In addition, evidence suggests that she was short, average in appearance, dark in complexion, and of Hittite descent. Prominent male elitist in Athens at her time would call people of Sappho's ethnic group uncivilized βαρβάροι or "Barbarians". Unless she were rich, she would have been at the bottom of the totem pole in Greek society. Nevertheless, she is one of the most prominent figures in Greek poetry.

For women today she represents female excellence in a male dominated society. That is primarily why is synonymous with lesbianism. However, there is no evidence indicating that she was, or was not, truly gay.

Poem 1: This is a poem recalling an apotheosis. In this poem she is sitting in a temple praying to Aphrodite, when suddenly she has a a vision of Aphrodite gloriously coming to her, speaking to her telepathically asking her "what hurts?". Then, just as suddenly, she is brought back to reality; however, she continues speaking to her as if Aphrodite were still there. At the end of the poem Sappho calls the goddess her "battle ally". Perhaps she is allied with Aphrodite in the battle for female equality in a male dominated society?

Poem 2: This is a poem about infatuation. In the first few stanzas it seems like Sappho is talking about the butterflies-in-stomach feeling of being in love, saying things like "Then in my bosom my heart wildly flutters, And, when on thee I gaze never so little, Bereft am I of all power of utterance". But then  in the last stanza, there seems to be a darker shift in the poem, as if something joyful was lost. She says: "Down courses in streams the sweat of emotion, A dread trembling o'erwhelms me".

I'm not quite sure of the philosophical value of Sappho's poems. It seems she uses her poetry to express personal experiences, not philosophical ideas.

zip it up and zip it out

Homer & Hesiod

Even though I have a budding affinity for ancient Hellenic culture, I have never read the works of Homer or Hesiod before being assigned in this class. I must say, I greatly enjoyed reading the iliad, odyssey, and theogony.

Homer: I grew up loving action movies, and I noticed quite a bit of similarities between the action heroes today and those described in Homer's epics. For example Rocky Balboa is known for taking quite a beating, yet he over comes all of his obstacles. Perhaps He could be inspired by Odysseus, overcoming his many obstacles and sufferings to be reunited with his family. I could also see a correlation between Achillies and heroes like John Rambo or Jason Bourne, these are characters who are masters of destruction, able to kill everything they come across. 

(Side Note: In the movies Jason is not known for being a destroyer; however, in the original books he is   without a doubt a stone cold mass murderer.)

As a student learning Attic Greek, I really appreciate Vince Lombardo's translations of Homer's epics. Not only does stay true to the original text, but also he provides a translation with modern vernacular so that even today's readers can grow fond of Homer's beautiful work. 

Overall, these poems are not really philosophical; however, they are very fun to read and are often alluded to in a variety philosophical works, which makes them works reading. 

 Hesiod's Theogony I found was a more confusing read to me for some reason. Nevertheless, with sufficient elbow-grease applied, I felt I was able to understand the gist of what was happening. The title θεογόνια which translates into "birth of the gods" is kind of a dead give away. Theogony is essentially a creation story for the olympic gods. It starts out with the narrator minding his own business, but suddenly muses show up and charge him to be the tool of telling this story. (Perhaps there is a similar experience with the Holy Spirit for Christians?) 

Overall, I think Theogony is more philosophical in nature juxtaposed to Homer's epics because it introduces philosophical ideas personified as gods. That may come off as confusing, but allow me to explain. For example, philosophers have taken great lengths to explain ideas such as justice. Though everyone somewhat has an idea of what justice is, it becomes much harder to define what it means. It is, however, much easier for someone to recognize when a person is acting justly, and then attribute their character just. 

Again, perhaps when the Greeks think of someone as being powerful, they think of someone who is not only wise, but also cunning and able to manipulate others. And if there were someone else that could pose a threat to them, this being could easily destroy whoever opposes them. This idea of power is perfectly personified as Zeus. Not to mention, power is just of many  philosophical concepts that are personified. 

Overall, Theogony I thought was confusing in part because my translation made it difficult, but a great read nevertheless.

zip it up and zip it out

An introduction: Who is in the box?

Howdy everyone, I'm new to this blog stuff so please bare with me. I know some of you who are reading this might be wondering why my blog is titled "The man in the glass box". I'm aware that this sounds strange; however, it is an idea I made up being inspired by both Plato's cave analogy in Republic and a passage in 1 Corinthians.

"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known."- 1 Corinthians 13:12

Imagine there is a woman who happens to come upon a large box made out of translucent glass. Though her vision is blurred and distorted from translucent film coating the glass, she sees the figure of a man inside the box. Straining her sight, the woman outside the box tries to see if she recognizes the strange figure inside the box. She is able to see certain characteristics about the man, noting his hair color, skin color, and his figure, however she can’t recognize who he is so she moves on. Another woman comes by the same box a year later except the translucent film has been peeled away. She is able to see the man inside the box clearly. The second woman is able to have relationship with the man, communicating to him through sign language. They both know each other, but are still rigidly separated by the glass between them. Everyday she revisits the man because she enjoys his company, but she is continually frustrated by the glass preventing them from speaking to each other. Desperate to finally talk to this man, the second woman aggressively attempts to break the glass but to no avail. She simply is not strong enough to cause any damage to this crystal clear force field. The man inside the box however, sees this and sympathizes with her. He strikes the glass, resulting a significant crack. Though he could easily break the glass entirely with one more strike, he chooses not to, seeing that it would be better for the woman to complete the destruction of the barrier. This woman once again tries to break the glass, and with every effort the crack becomes larger. she is filled with hope that soon the glass will be broken, and they will see each other face to face. 

Parallels:

Philosophically this parallels the cave analogy and the quest for enlightenment. The first woman is like those who can see shadows on the wall in the cave. She was able to see bits and pieces of the truth, but never could distinguish what it really is. The second woman is like one who gets a glimpse of the truth, recognizes it, and pursues it. (Ask me, if you have any questions).

In a spiritual sense, the man inside the box is God. The first woman represents someone who has spirituality besides true and perfect Christianity. It encompasses pagans and even modern day religions. The second woman is at first like the Jews in the old testament. The woman was able to have a relationship with God, however it was marked by separation. God himself had to break the barrier (justification), renewing our hope to see him face to face. The second woman than plays a role of a a Christian, or the Church as a whole, in completing the destruction of the glass (sanctification). 

I know that the analogy could perhaps be muddy in some areas, but if the basic idea is understood that is what matters. 

zip it up, and zip it out.