Theory and experience

I've read through many tomes and scientific treatises that dismiss the idea of free will as a fantasy. I can readily admit that human freedom is constrained by things like genetics, conditioning, experience and social situations but somehow I can't completely give up the notion. 

I thought about this again, freely or not, whilst perusing James Boswell's Life of Samuel Johnson, in which the  latter said, "All theory is against the freedom of the will; all experience for it." I think I'm in the experience column.

Note: I'm about to hit the road for a while so posts will be irregular.

INEQUALITY. Here's another look at why it matters.

URGENT SMART SLIME MOLD UPDATE here.

PRISONS. Recidivism is expensive.

GOAT ROPE ADVISORY LEVEL: ELEVATED

A radical Tory

I've been making my slow way through James Boswell's Life of Samuel Johnson, mostly to indulge my affection for 18th century English prose. Johnson was an interesting person, one for whom conversation was a game of one-up-manship.

His political views were generally very conservative. His groundbreaking dictionary of the English language included the following definitions of the two parties of his day:

Tory: One who adheres to the ancient constitution of the state, and the apostolical hierarchy of the church of England, opposed to a Whig.

Whig: The name of a faction.

Yet on a critical issue of his day this hardcore Tory was ahead of his time. At one point, Boswell noted disapprovingly that "He had always been very  zealous against slavery in every form..." He even went so far as to drink a toast at Oxford in which he said "Here's to the next insurrection of the negroes in the West Indies."

Unlike Boswell, Johnson had no sympathy for the American revolutionaries of the 1770s. In fact, he put his finger precisely on a major contradiction of the period when he asked, "how is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of the negroes?"

Good question.

FRAME THIS. Here's George Lakoff on what to look for in tonight's presidential debates.

COOL RANT by a good friend here.

IT'S NICE TO BE IMPORTANT, but it's more important to be nice. If you're a baboon anyway.

GOAT ROPE ADVISORY LEVEL: ELEVATED

One that got away

I've been amusing myself by reading Boswell's Life of Samuel Johnson. I'm not sure why other than the fact that I like the way those 18th century dudes talk and this book is all about conversation. Back in the day, Johnson was a literary lion, although he is scarcely read today and lives on mostly through his biographer.

Anyhow, old Sam struck a nerve in this morning's reading in a discussion of Italy:

"A man who has not been in Italy, is always conscious of an inferiority, from his not having seen what it is expected a man should see. The grand object of travelling is to see the shores of the Mediterranean. On these shores were the four great Empires of the world; the Assyrian, the Persian,  the Grecian, and the Roman.--All our religion, almost all our law, almost all our arts, almost all that sets us above savages, has come to us from the shores of the Mediterranean."

I wouldn't go that far, but he has a point. The sad part for me is that I actually did get to go to Italy last summer and ran around quite a bit for the little time I was there. BUT, alas, I didn't get to see the Mediterranean. I was pretty close at Ravenna but we only had a little time and it just didn't work out.

It is my custom when I meet a worthy body of water to touch and bless myself with a few drops of it on my forehead the way observant Roman Catholics use holy water and I REALLY wanted to do that with the Mediterranean.

Maybe next time. If there is one.

I HATE TO SAY I TOLD YOU SO, but the stimulus, aka American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, actually worked.

RUNNING BEHIND. I meant to include this item by Jared Bernstein on the latest Census poverty data last week. Here's the good news: for the first time in ages, the percentage of uninsured Americans actually fell, thanks largely to the Affordable Care Act.

WILL DISNEY SUE? Here's a look at Mickey Mouse on Mercury.

GOAT ROPE ADVISORY LEVEL: ELEVATED

So much for the unities

The Greek philosopher Aristotle had enormous influence on Western thought since his works were rediscovered (thanks in part to Muslim scholars) around the 12th century. His thought provided the framework for St. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica as well as for Dante’s Divine Comedy.

Parts of his Ethics and Politics hold up well to this day.

His theories on art as expounded in the Poetics continued to be influential long after his metaphysical influence had waned and were going strong during Shakespeare’s time (search this blog in the upper left hand corner for more on that).

Many dramatists of that time and beyond adhered to Aristotle’s theory of “the unities” in tragic art, meaning that a work should take place at one time and in one place with one overriding theme. The best example of this is probably Sophocles’ Oedipus.

That would be yet another convention Shakespeare threw out the window. I could be wrong, but I can’t think of a single tragedy of his that fits that model. As Samuel Johnson put it:

Whether Shakespeare knew the unities, and rejected them by design, or deviated from them by happy ignorance, it is, I think, impossible to decide, and useless to inquire. We may reasonably suppose, that, when he rose to notice, he did not want the counsels and admonitions of scholars and critics, and that he at last deliberately persisted in a practice, which he might have begun by chance. As nothing is essential to the fable, but unity of action, and as the unities of time and place arise evidently from false assumptions, and, by circumscribing the extent of the drama, lessen its variety, I cannot think it much to be lamented, that they were not known by him, or not observed: Nor, if such another poet could arise, should I very vehemently reproach him, that his first act passed at Venice, and his next in Cyprus. Such violations of rules merely positive, become the comprehensive genius of Shakespeare…

It is true that most of the action in Hamlet happens around the castle in Elsinore, although there is also the famous graveyard scene. But that’s as close to the unities as it gets. The action is stretched out over a period of weeks or months, at least long enough for Hamlet to see the ghost, put on an antic disposition, set up a play within a play, whack Polonius, get sent to England, get captured and ransomed by pirates, and return to Elsinore.

The plot is hardly unified either. Shakespeare took the template for a simple revenge play and broke that mold as well. There are several subplots (involving Ophelia, Polonius, Rosencrantz/Guildenstern, etc).

The main plot of the play isn’t in fact revenge; instead it is the title character himself who hijacked the whole thing. More on that tomorrow.

THE COSTS OF INEQUALITY are the subject of this item from the Financial Times.

LABOR LAW REFORM goes back to the drawing board in the wake of recent political developments.

THE FUTURE OF COAL under the Obama administration is discussed here.

WHEN IT COMES TO BANKS, boring may be good.

GOAT ROPE ADVISORY LEVEL: ELEVATED