98 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2013
    1. And he requires shelter, for there are frightful powers which continuously break in upon him, powers which oppose scientific "truth" with completely different kinds of "truths" which bear on their shields the most varied sorts of emblems.

      The idea that "truths" are not Big or Little T truths, they are simply an act of perception.

    2. We have seen how it is originally language which works on the construction of concepts, a labor taken over in later ages by science.

      We take a turn here to see how deceptive language can be. It's power to persuade by verbiage, not just by what is being said.

    3. "If a workman were sure to dream for twelve straight hours every night that he was king," said Pascal, "I believe that he would be just as happy as a king who dreamt for twelve hours every night that he was a workman.

      This made me think of the Think-Tank experiment. Would you give up your real life to live in a perfect world that wasn't real. If you do not know of this, watch this clip form The Ricky Gervais show. Even if you do, watch it anyway. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkvkSSfcyVo

    4. It is even a difficult thing for him to admit to himself that the insect or the bird perceives an entirely different world from the one that man does,

      I know it's a product of its time, but it's interesting to note that many animals/creature do not recognize themselves. Self representation is not a quality of all living life.

    5. A movable host of metaphors, metonymies, and; anthropomorphisms: in short, a sum of human relations which have been poetically and rhetorically intensified, transferred, and embellished, and which, after long usage, seem to a people to be fixed, canonical, and binding. Truths are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions

      This is not his view on truth, just his view of "truth." I wonder what his view on empiricism would be. Probably something terrible...

    6. But at the same time, from boredom and necessity, man wishes to exist socially and with the herd; therefore, he needs to make peace and strives accordingly to banish from his world at least the most flagrant bellum omni contra omnes

      This isn't a wish, it's a property of our evolution. We evolved in a social world as well as a physical world. As a social primate, it's something we do naturally. OH SHIT, NATURE!

    7. What does man actually know about himself?

      This is breaking the themes that we've read so far. Not agreeing or disagreeing, but a good twist in the happiness of all-knowingness we've seemed to discuss so far.

    8. Deception, flattering, lying, deluding, talking behind the back, putting up a false front, living in borrowed splendor, wearing a mask, hiding behind convention, playing a role for others and for oneself-in short, a continuous fluttering around the solitary flame of vanity-is so much the rule and the law among men that there is almost nothing which is less comprehensible than how an honest and pure drive for truth could have arisen among them.

      Nietzsche is quick to point out extreme human flaws. Negative nancy. Really sets the tone for the reading, very dark.

    9. The pride

      I like this word, not sure if meant to create a double meaning. Pride as in the feeling, but pride as in the group.

    10. . And when it is all over with the human intellect, nothing will have happened.

      This is so darkly true. We tend to praise our impact on the world, but it's very much something we believe to be true, but is not. If human kind disappeared tomorrow, the Earth would be back to awesome in about 500 years (I think, there is a whole book about this. Correct this if you have read the book and recall better than I).

    11. One might invent such a fable, and yet he still would not have adequately illustrated how miserable, how shadowy and transient, how aimless and arbitrary the human intellect looks within nature

      ouch. Brutal, but interesting to see that he draws mankind into nature instead of excelling from it.

    12. That was the most arrogant and mendacious minute of "world history," but nevertheless, it was only a minute.

      i like this idea of keeping time and frame in mind. The worst of the worst only lasts moments in comparison to time.

    1. In this way Quintilian reveals himself to be quite ignorant of dialectic, for he has either not heard or not read anything about the role of judging, and about the many types of syllogisms, both simple and complex.

      This made me laugh simply because of the word "Judging" used here. Reading this, my thought was "he doesn't know how to judge, like I do. Watch me do it in a phrase where I use the word." I know he's not making a claim on judging people, but the usage makes me laugh all the same.

    2. He thinks rhetoric is one of the liberal arts, not in fact a common art, and yet at the same time he deems rhetoric to be an art, a science, and a virtue

      Again, another broad definition of Art. It depends on how we feel the word describes the idea in question. Some people find art to be all encompassing of ideas, other "don't get it."

    3. I con-sider the subject matters of the arts to be distinct and separate.

      I can see some indie hipster going on about this is what makes art so great is we discuss what makes art art. And this is a good question, and I find the answers we get don't tell us what art is but how the speaker interprets art. HashTagDeep

    4. For all that, Quintilian continues and main-tains his own opinion that since dialectic is a virtue, so therefore is rhetoric. Quintilian should turn the whole thing around and should more correctly conclude that since dialectic is not a moral virtue which can shape a good man, so neither is rhetoric.

      Dictating opinion? Hmmm, okay. By definition, opinion is grounded in personal anecdote and perception. This follows the same kind of logic. "He says that X = Y and therefore so does Z. But no! X=Y so W=Z." This is the overall issue with syllogisms: making inferences. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

    5. -and that no one can be an orator unless he is a good man (this is in the first chapter of the twelfth book) and for this reason, I believe, he will conclude that instruction in virtue is a part of rhetoric.

      Jerks need not apply. I like how the lines of good and evil are a constant theme in rhetoric. It has such a bad connotation, and these ideas perpetuate it. Anyone of any sort can use rhetoric in anyway they want.

    6. There are two universal, general gifts be-stowed by nature upon man, Reason and Speech; dialectic is the theory of the former, grammar and rhetoric of the latte

      Language is probably the greatest tool human kind has. Reasoning exists in many animals, but extensive communication networks and language is ours! Also, poor use of the word "Universal" here. If it was a universal gift, it would be for everyone and not just man.

    7. I admit that that philosopher had an amazing fecundity of talent

      Honesty or trying to build up the opponent to make the deconstruction more impressive? You decide.

    8. supreme help

      Ramus is full of emotionally heavy words. Really tried to play on the impact of the words to persuade us.

    9. he created unfathomable darkness

      This sounds so dark and horrible. Overstatement is an understatement

    10. Most excellent Maecenas

      Introduction by Bill and Ted

  2. Oct 2013
    1. but he must also sway the mind so as to subdue the will.

      This makes me think of wrestling. A head lock by eloquence.

    2. For if a man be not moved by the force of truth

      Truth is perception. Cognitively, we perceive opinions and subjective ideas of truth.

    3. Only two conditions are to be insisted upon, that our hearer or companion should have an earnest desire to learn the truth, and should have capacity of mind to receive it in whatever form it may be communicated

      This is a good change between meeting your audience at their level from earlier philosophers and now you gotta make sure they are up to your level.

    4. but in making clear what was obscure

      As an aspiring professor myself, I really like this idea.

    5. LL

      I love how this writing "isn't about Rhetoric" and now we are not just being told about the art of it, but how to acquire it. Smooth.

    6. as infants cannot learn to speak except by learning words and phrases from those who do speak

      Read some Chompsky. Language is an internal process. The Language Instinct from Pinker is good, too.

    7. Who is such a fool as to think this wisdom?

      There is something to be said about taking the opposite side. In the sciences, there is an idea of falsifiablility. To make ones argument or studies better, they take the side of the other idea and try to prove it true instead. I don't think that's what's he's going for, but to discount taking up an idea that we disagree with/believe is false is advanced skepticism/devil's advocate


      This class is a lie! However, it seems that we could now break down any type of writing as rhetoric. Even throwing this phrase does not negate the nature of the writing.

    1. That mere boys should sit mixed with young men, I do not approve

      No Fun League. I've learned a lot from older people or more senior peoples in my various classes. Experience can be passed on for one to take in to help in their educational path. I do not approve. HA!

    2. Hence it will result that the pupil will depend on the judgment of the master and will think that he has expressed properly whatever shall have been approved by him.

      NO! I say NO! Peer reinforcement is a welcomed idea. This is not me saying peers should have the last say, but encouragement and support should come from everywhere.

    1. Memory (as I shall show in its proper place) is most necessary to an orator and is eminently strengthened and nourished by exercise; and, at the age of which we are now speaking, and which cannot, as yet, produce anything of itself, it is almost the only faculty that can be improved by the aid of teachers.

      Memory is actually very bad. Don't put your chips into this idea. Elizabeth Loftus is a good place to start if you disagree.

    2. Some have thought that boys, as long as they are under seven years of age, should not be set to learn, because that is the earliest age that can understand what is taught, and endure the labor of learning.

      I support and do not support this statement at the same time. I think many seven year olds are still trying to understand the world in their own way. It depends on what is being taught and how it is being taught. Before you poop your pampers, read/listen to Ken Robinson. I agree with much of what he has to say on the state of learning in children.

    3. We are by nature most tenacious of what we have imbibed in our infant years

      Almost a Freudian idea. This is not at all correct, but still an interesting idea for the time.

    4. As birds are born to fly, horses to run, and wild beasts to show fierceness, so to us peculiarly belong activity and sagacity of understanding; hence the origin of the mind is thought to be from heaven. 2. But dull and unteachable persons are no more produced in the course of nature than are persons marked by monstrosity and deformities, such are certainly but few.

      As I was reading this, I thought another syllogism was coming, then he threw a curve-ball. I can dig this. Reasoning doesn't come naturally, and many people think it is.

    1. Revenge, too, is pleasant; it is pleasant to get anything that it is painful to fail to get, and angry people suffer extreme pain when they fail to get their revenge; but they enjoy the prospect of getting it. Victory also is pleasant, and not merely to "bad losers," but to every one; the winner sees himself in the light of a champion, and everybody has a more or less keen appetite for being that.

      Holy shit, this took a dark turn. This must have been Aristotle's Hot Topic Jr. High phase. At least someone has the balls to say revenge is sweet. I take it back, I love this.

    1. The things that happen by chance are all those whose cause cannot be determined, that have no purpose, and that happen neither always nor usually nor in any fixed way.

      This is not how statistic work.

    1. Fame means being respected by everybody, or having some quality that is desired by all men, or by most, or by the good, or by the wise.

      I love how things have changed. One of the most talked about people in the media right now is known simply for acting like a slut on an award show. Aristotle, you would be so let down.

  3. Sep 2013
    1. No; things that are true and things that are better are, by their nature, practically always easier to prove and easier to believe in.

      Disagree for the block. I don't know where to begin with how much I disagree with this and don't want to present ideas that offend people, so I'll just leave it at that

    2. Hence the man who makes a good guess at truth is likely to make a good guess at probabilities

      At first, I didn't like this quote, then I thought back to good ol' Oakley's stats class. We make scientific theories based on what idea is most likely to happen (we reject/do not reject the null hypothesis, but we do not say we accept the null hypothesis). Science: putting me in my place since I had a place to be put.

    3. Rhetoric is the counterpart of Dialectic. Both alike are concerned with such things as come, more or less, within the general ken of all men and belong to no definite science. Accordingly all men make use, more or less, of both; for to a certain extent all men attempt to discuss statements and to maintain them, to defend themselves and to attack others. Ordinary people do this either at random or through practice and from acquired habit. Both ways being possible, the subject can plainly be handled systematically, for it is possible to inquire the reason why some speakers succeed through practice and others spontaneously; and every one will at once agree that such an inquiry is the function of an art.

      All I could think of was Crow's one liner from the Cave Dweller's Episode: Could you be a little more vague, please?

    1. However, neither class of teachers is in possession of a science by which they can make capable athletes or capable orators out of whomsoever they please

      I disagree with this to an extent. When it boils down to it, yes, it is the student who puts forth the effort or the will. However, a good teach can give the student the tools they need to succeed in sport or knowledge. No pressure, Professor Boyle.

    2. My accuser has mentioned also the friendship which existed between me and Timotheus,60 and has attempted to calumniate us both, nor did any sense of shame restrain him from saying slanderous and utterly infamous things about a man who is dead, to whom Athens is indebted for many services.

      Oh, Isocrates. You name dropper! Is this the opposite of Guilty by association? He does group himself with the bloke then praises him. Ethos, I choose you!

    3. For they exhort their followers to a kind of virtue and wisdom which is ignored by the rest of the world and is disputed among themselves; I, to a kind which is recognized by all.

      Sensing a theme of Tu QuoQue throughout this writing. His defense for himself is a critique of "the other guy." He is not talking about the virtues and wisdoms he teaches, just that "Those guys" teach them poorly. Step up your game, Isocrates!

    4. First of all, tell me what eloquence could be more righteous or more just than one which praises our ancestors in a manner worthy of their excellence and of their achievements?

      Appealing to Ancient Wisdom. Just 'cause it's old doesn't make it better.

    5. I deserve to have your deepest gratitude for having so glorified Athens and our ancestors and the wars which were fought in those days that the orators who had composed discourses on this theme have destroyed them all,

      Wow. What an emotional appeal. He just needs to add "and I saved lots of sad little puppies!"

    6. All men take as much pleasure in listening to this kind of prose as in listening to poetry, and many desire to take lessons in it, believing that those who excel in this field are wiser and better and of more use to the world than men who speak well in court.

      Not sure really what to call this except a combo of Glittering Generalities and trying to boost his credibility. I'm sure there's a better word for it, but South Park is on and I am distracted brainally.

    7. But you have heard also from my accuser that I have received many great presents from Nicocles, the king of the Salaminians.39 And yet, can any one of you be persuaded that Nicocles made me these presents in order that he might learn how to plead cases in cour

      This ties into a similar concept above in relation to Burden of Proof. Hearing one side and neglecting the other. The finger-pointer should be providing evidence, not leaving it up to the accused to prove they are innocent. This ties into Causation/Correlation.

    8. Let me ask you, however, not to pay any attention to what you have heard about me in the past from my would-be slanderers and calumniators

      A reminder of what was said above. Reaffirming the listener/reader to ignore the past and what was said and focus on what is being said. Repetition... good? and... oh no... what have I become?! Agreeing with the use of repeating?! BOYLE YOU'VE TAINTED ME

    9. Indeed no one may rely on the honesty of his life as a guarantee that he will be able to live securely in Athens; for the men who have chosen to neglect what is their own and to plot against what belongs to others do not keep their hands off citizens who live soberly and bring before you only those who do evil; on the contrary, they advertise their powers in their attacks upon men who are entirely innocent, and so get more money from those who are clearly guilty.

      I know this is going somewhere, Boyle. So please don't take this as a comment like hating repetition. Okay, we good? Good. So far this entire reading is nothing but Tu Quoque. I am sure Isocrates is going to eventually explain himself, but this is all the logical fallacy of using critique to critique. Don't yell at me!

    10. that when the accuser makes his charges we give ear to whatever he may say; but when the accused endeavors to refute them, we sometimes do not endure even to hear his voic

      This is a large problem that we even see regularly today. We tend to believe one side (usually the finger pointers) and discredit the defense. Confirmation Bias, you are a jerk.

    11. Ours is a shameful state of inconsistency; for while it is acknowledged that in our life in general we are the most merciful20 and gentle of all the Hellenes, yet in the conduct of our trials here we manifestly give the lie to this reputation.

      I like and hate this statement at the same time. I understand the point is to say "Look, we're really cool and polite and we even let kids borrow our Xbox from time to time ALL the time!"to create a soft blow for "Yeah, but we perpetuate this crap and give it merit. We know it's happening, but we can't be bothered." It might slip-past of a lot of readers.

    12. I consider that in all the world there are none so depraved and so deserving of the severest punishment as those who have the audacity to charge others with the offenses of which they themselves are guilty.

      Not sure if Overstatement because he's really mad or really thinks hypocrisy is the worst thing on the planet. insert Suspicious Fry Meme here

    13. eulogy

      I really like the use of "Eulogy" here. This is a word that has a lot of connotation. Obviously, it is something that happens after one's death, but it also is from someone who knows the deceased well. It's also something look highly upon, like being on a soapbox or in the spot-light.

    14. for I hoped that this would serve both as the best means of making known the truth about me and, at the same time, as a monument, after my death, more noble than statues of bronze.12

      "Writing is perhaps the greatest of human inventions, binding together people who never knew each other, citizens of distant epochs. Books break the shackles of time." - Carl Sagan. This was the first thing I thought of here. Not just self-representation, but the power of words so that the idea and thought can remain throughout time. And space. Either that, or I wanted to work Carl Sagan into this conversation some how.

    1. "science" which can teach us to do under all circumstances the things which will insure our happiness and success.

      Happiness has far too much variability to be considered scientific, in my opinion. It's all a matter of opinion and personal experience. Hence my disagreement with his "judgment not knowledge" bit.

    2. Isocrates regards himself as one of the sophists, but sets himself apart from the "common herd."

      Where there different types of sophists? Kind of like how there are varying types of republicans or christians. I don't know, as I am not Mr. Philosophy, so I am curious.

    3. oblivious of the fact that the arts are made great, not by those who are without scruple in boasting about them, but by those who are able to discover all of the resources which each art affords.

      "I believe entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot." - Steve Martin. That's what this section made me think of upon reading it.

    4. For they are themselves so stupid and conceive others to be so dull that, although the speeches which they compose are worse than those which some laymen improvise, nevertheless they promise to make their students such clever orators that they will not overlook any of the possibilities which a subject affords

      Such loaded words in this phrase. Not just to the point, but very brutal diction. I also get a tone of sarcasm in the phrase "such clever orators." I might be the only one.

    5. But men who inculcate virtue and sobriety--is it not absurd if they do not trust in their own students before all others?

      It's almost as if they saw this as a job.

    6. But these professors have gone so far in their lack of scruple that they attempt to persuade our young men that if they will only study under them they will know what to do in life and through this knowledge will become happy and prosperous

      I see both sides here. The teacher who I do my labstudy/undergrad work is really supportive of me getting help from other teachers. But I've seen the "my way is the best way" mentality.

    7. If all who are engaged in the profession of education were willing to state the facts instead of making greater promises than they can possibly fulfill, they would not be in such bad repute with the lay-public.

      Possible dating? Anecdotally, I hear teachers as being unpaid resources.

  4. caseyboyle.net caseyboyle.net
    1. Neither will he be the friend of any one who is greatly his inferior, for the tyrant will despise him, and will never seriously regard him as a friend.

      I don't know how politics was viewed during Socratimes, but I think this isn't relevant today. Lying and fake-friendships run rampant in the states.

    2. that the better and wiser should rule and have more than the inferior.

      This makes me think of Dr. Shermer explaining that smarter people are irrational, just like the uneducated. However, they are better at justifying their irrational beliefs.

    3. This man will never cease talking nonsense

      I want to agree, but I can see the tactic Socrates is using: Begging the Question. I mean REPETITION?! Fuck that!

    4. Philosophy, as a part of education, is an excellent thing, and there is no disgrace to a man while he is young in pursuing such a study; but when he is more advanced in years, the thing becomes ridiculous, and I feel towards philosophers as I do towards those who lisp and imitate children

      Is he drawing a connection that pursuit and engagement over time in Philosophy is childish? I am pretty sure debating about it and "What makes rhetoric rhetoric etcetc" qualifies as engaging in Philosophy. I find a lot of hypocrisy in this statement should this be the case. If not, then just know that sour candy is delicious.

    5. For the truth is, Socrates, that you, who pretend to be engaged in the pursuit of truth, are appealing now to the popular and vulgar notions of right, which are not natural, but only conventional

      I see Scorates as very opposite. I know it's part of the way the questions are asked, but Gorgias was definitive in his responses whereas Socrates is all over the place. I find this disagreement falls inline with the methods of questioning

    6. Gorgias in his modesty replied that he would,

      Gorgias and modesty are two things that don't go hand-in-hand. Downplaying Gorgias? "Modesty" is a charged word

    7. POLUS: What sort of an art is cookery? SOCRATES: Not an art at all, Polus.

      So maths is an art until it comes to the use of cooking? Not sure I agree, Socrates.

    8. Clearly not

      Alright, this is a total slippery slope here, but is Gorgias proclaiming an inability to be unjust now or ever? Quite the bold statement. Not knowing anything about Gorgias, did he have anything to say about objectivity within the personal narrative (sorry that sounds like an egg-head phrase, it's the best I can think of) or did he believe in absolutism? If so, he could be best friends with Ayn Rand.

    9. And yet, Socrates, rhetoric should be used like any other competitive art, not against everybody,—the rhetorician ought not to abuse his strength any more than a pugilist or pancratiast or other master of fence;—because he has powers which are more than a match either for friend or enemy, he ought not therefore to strike, stab, or slay his friends.

      It was mentioned above that Gorgias made rhetoric sound sinister, and think this is a good follow up. We tend to receive persuasion and rhetoric when mixed with politics with bad connotation. And I saw where the poster was coming from. I am glad this clears the air up. However, I think Rhetoric Man is on par with Captain Hindsight as the lamest of the super heroes.

    10. and this again proves that knowledge and belief differ

      Not to the human brain. If you believe Strawberry Pop-Tarts are better than Blue Berry Pop-Tarts and you know that 1 + 1 = 2 your brain processes the information in the exact same way. This is what can make persuasion difficult: how to you get someone to view an idea they see as true in a different way? This is a little off topic, but still relevant in the way Gorgias explains his views.

    11. Does he who teaches anything persuade men of that which he teaches or not?

      This can lead to what we call "The Authority Bias." Saying something is true simply because a person of power, like a teacher, said it was so. "Dr. Cruise from L. Ron Hubbard College University said e-meters really work, so they must."

    12. that rhetoric is the artificer of persuasion

      This is also how I defined rhetoric as well. As articulated ad nauseum in this piece so far, Rhetoric is all encompassing and has a part in many things. While I might disagree that it is all powerful in all things as is hinted at, it is always there.

    13. And the same, Gorgias, is true of the other arts:—all of them treat of discourse concerning the subjects with which they severally have to do.

      I know Boyle said the repetition is used for effect, but that doesn't work for me. I find it as rambling, and I start losing interest in what is said because I want to further the discussion. One could argue it is a lack of patience on my part, but I see it as "shit or get off the pot." Examples are not explanations. I know, I know... I am a stick in the mud

    14. And music is concerned with the composition of melodies?

      Setting Up Repetition. If one agrees with A and believes in B etc etc then you will agree with the main point made. It's a logical fallacy, but a debate tactic we commonly see. It can be an effective tactic in relation to logic (seems paradoxical).

    15. Yes, Socrates, and a good one too, if you would call me that which, in Homeric language, 'I boast myself to be.'

      It's interesting how if this were a friend on Facebook, you'd probably be aggravated by such bravado. Confidence and arrogance is a fine line, but with the power of Hindsight we can see it's justified. I wonder if it was used to boost his status or as a sign of confidence for more students?

    16. Yes, indeed, but that was no answer to the question: nobody asked what was the quality, but what was the nature, of the art, and by what name we were to describe Gorgias.

      I'm glad this is here. I began to feel a little lost in the reading, as if I wasn't catching on to the answer and was caught in word-salad. I'm no philosophy buff, so a lot of this is foreign to me.

    17. CALLICLES: Tell me, Chaerephon, is Socrates in earnest, or is he joking?

      I think this is where we stop. I will double check with the PDF for my own sake. This note is for my sake.

    1. For example, whenever hostile bodies put on their bronze and iron war-gear of ward and defense against enemies, if the visual sense beholds this, it is troubled and it troubles the soul, so that often panic-stricken men flee future danger <as if it were> present.

      Good comparison. not just in connecting the idea, but effectiveness. The image is striking when thought of. An ironclad warrior at the flowershop.

    2. If Love, <being> a god, <has> the divine power of gods, how could the weaker being have the power to reject this and to ward it off? But if it is a human disease and an error of the soul, it ought not to be blamed as a sin but ought rather to be accounted a misfortune.

      This seems a lot like Euthyphros Dilemma. "Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?"

    3. For just as different drugs draw off different humors from the body, and some put an end to disease and others to life, so too of discourses: some give pain, others delight, others terrify, others rouse the hearers to courage, and yet others by a certain vile persuasion drug and trick the soul.

      Drugs also attain their effects based on how the body fight them (not related to the drug itself, a body response to change). The more you know starswoosh This also applies to the writing. We can trick ourselves by the reasoning we use.

    4. But opinion, being slippery and unsteady, surrounds those who rely on it with slippery and unsteady successes.

      Agreement has been tasted. Opinion and anecdotes serve no purpose in truth, but in story and entertainment. The more one relies on opinion to make fact,the more loopholes are needed for reasoning.

    5. Those who have persuaded and do persuade anyone about anything are shapers of lying discourse.

      Glittering generalities? Me thinks so.

    6. She produced the greatest erotic desires in most men.

      GREAT connotation. A very good and to-the-point way to create and identify with a characteristic. Pathos might be a stretch, but it is a term that pops up in my head.

    7. lying--and, having shown the truth, to put an end to ignorance.

      Juxtaposition. Lying is a thoughtful act and ignorance is not. Interested to see how the ideas play throughout the article.

    8. The order proper to a city is being well-manned; to a body, beauty; to a soul, wisdom; to a deed, excellence; and to a discourse, truth--and the opposites of these are disorder.

      Sam Harris would be proud! As he finds, a good comparison sets the stage for better understanding and changing minds. This one is a good one.

    1. Or another example: if you need to remember the name " Pyrilampes " you must connect it with pyr (fire) and lampein (to shine). These are examples for words

      We can increase memory by changing the way we learn it. Like a word association. Much like the Baker Potter paradox (we remember people who describe themselves as potters or bakers vs someone named Baker or Potter).

    2. it is useful for everything, for wisdom as well as for the conduct of life.

      Memory is actually extremely fallible.

    3. An interesting look at music. I like music and playing instruments, and have the most respect for multi-instrument players because it is a very difficult demand. Composers, back in the complements!

    4. A lot of tie-ins to war and overseas politics. Not worth getting into and starting a huge shit-fest, but it's easy to see that one man's hero is another man's villain.

    5. (21) But there is also an argument about the disgraceful and the seemly which says that each is distinct from the other. Since if anyone should ask those who say that the same thing is both disgraceful and seemly whether they have ever done anything seemly, they would admit that they have also done something disgraceful, if disgraceful and seemly are really the same thing. (22) And if they know any man to be handsome,2 they would also know the same man to be ugly.3 And if they know any man to be white, they would also know the same man to be black. And it is seemly to honour the gods and again disgraceful to honour the gods, if disgraceful and seemly are really the same thing

      Good section about cognitive dissonance. This means to hold two opposing opinions at the same time. The kind of stuff I love to study.

    6. Good Stuff

    7. because not all men are of the same opinion

      This is the point of the whole essay, summed up after two pages with half a sentence. Took a while, but we made it.

    8. To the Thessalians it is seemly for a man to select horses and mules from a herd himself and train them, and also to take one of the cattle and slaughter, skin and cut it up himself, but in Sicily these tasks are disgraceful and the work of slaves. (12) To the Macedonians it appears to be seemly for young girls, before they are married, to fall in love and to have intercourse with a man, but when a girl is married it is a disgrace. (As far as the Greeks are concerned it is disgraceful at either time.) (13) To the Thracians it is an ornament for young girls to be tattooed but with others tattoo-marks are a punishment for those who do wrong. And the Scythians think it seemly that who (ever) kills a man should scalp him and wear the scalp on his horse's bridle, and, having gilded the skull (or) lined it with silver, should drink from it and make a libation to the gods. Among the Greeks, no one would be willing to enter the same house as a man who had behaved like that. (14) The Massagetes cut up their parents and eat them, and they think that to be buried in their children is the most beautiful grave imaginable, but in Greece, if anyone did such a thing, he would be driven out of the country and would die an ignominious death for having committed such disgraceful and terrible deeds

      Reminds me of the series "Taboo." Acceptability and the norm vary from culture to culture. This hits on the earlier point of "One man's trash is another man's treasure." One man's gift piano is another horse's mouth."

    9. And the battle between the Centaurs and the Lapiths was good for the Lapiths but bad for the Centaurs. And, what is more, the battle which we are told took place between the gods and the giants (with the resulting victory for the gods) was good for the gods but bad for the giants.

      Look, we get it. Winning is good, losing is bad. Good can be good, good can be bad. Stop starting every sentence with "and."

    10. (5) (And) further, if a tool is corroded or blunted or broken, this is good for the blacksmith but bad for everyone else. And certainly if a pot gets smashed, this is good for the potters, but bad for everyone else. And if shoes are worn out and ripped apart, this is good for the cobbler but bad for everyone else.

      This is an interesting take on how what makes something good is relative. "One Man's Trash is Another Man's Treasure." "Candy for some, peanuts to others." "Why does my foot taste of elderberry?"