29 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2013
    1. never-never lan

      Kind of a silly comment: had Peter Pan been written yet? Or was the idea of "never-never land" a popular concept in the day?

    2. When a real storm cloud thunders above him, he wraps himself in his cloak, and with slow steps he walks from beneath it

      wow! again, his writing at times is almost poetic

    3. -and this is what the honest Athenian believed- then, as in a dream, anything is possible at each moment

      great point!

    4. waking man, so that it will be as colorful, irregular, lacking in results and coherence, charming, and eternally new as the world of dreams. Indeed, it is only by means of the rigid and regular web of concepts that the waking man clearly sees that he is awake; and it is precisely because of this that he sometimes thinks that he must be dreaming when this web of concepts is torn by art

      such an interesting way to separate the dream world vs. the awake world

    5. Against this, the following must be said: if each us had a different kind of sense perception-if we could only perceive things now as a bird, now as a worm, now as a plant, or if one of us saw a stimulus as red, another as blue, while a third even heard the same stimulus as a sound-then no one would speak of such a regularity of nature, rather, nature would be grasped only as a creation which is subjective in the highest degree.

      Precisely. We can only relate the world to ourselves and our own perspective, because that is all we have

    6. At bottom, what the investigator of such truths is seeking is only the metamorphosis of the world into man

      Again, this is man relating the world around him to his own self

    7. his construction must be like one constructed of spiders' webs: delicate enough to be carried along by the waves, strong enough not to be blown apart by every wind

      His writing here is almost poetic. Very pretty!

    8. Truths are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions- they are metaphors that have become worn out and have been drained of sensuous force, coins which have lost their embossing and are now considered as metal and no longer as coins.

      I'm starting to wonder whether or not this guy thinks there is anything good or beautiful in life. From his opinions laid out so far, it seems like he must live a bleak life, due to his skepticism of anything that enriches existence

    9. we believe that we know something about the things themselves when we speak of trees, colors, snow, and flowers; and yet we possess nothing but metaphors for things--metaphors which correspond in no way to the original entities

      And this is exactly what linguists are talking about when they say that words are simply symbols for the things that they represent

    10. This creator only designates the relations of things to men, and for expressing these relations he lays hold of the boldest metaphors

      I can understand his reasoning in this statement. Our language describes the world and things around us in relation to mankind. Kind of ego-centrical if you think about it

    11. if he will not be content with empty husks, then he will always exchange truths for illusions

      I think that definitely depends on how one define's truth, and where they believe truth comes from

    12. Is language the adequate expression of all realities

      Great question, and I think the answer is 'no'. Each language has it's own restrictions in expressing certain ideas, emotions, or situations. I definitely think that there are boundaries that can confine our expression in any language

    13. man now wants nothing but truth: he desires the pleasant, life-preserving consequences of truth. He is indifferent toward pure knowledge which has no consequences; toward those truths which are possibly harmful and destructive he is even hostilely inclined

      This is actually an interesting observation that I can see being true about much of mankind

    14. What men avoid by excluding the liar is not so much being defrauded as it is being harmed by means of fraud

      isn't that the same thing?

    15. bellum omni contra omne

      um... ????

    16. What does man actually know about himself?

      I think this is a very good question, actually. On that I think each human being spends their life trying to figure out

    17. 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

      He certainly doesn't have a very good impression of mankind around him, does he?

    18. It is remarkable that this was brought about by the intellect, which was certainly allotted to these most unfortunate, delicate, and ephemeral beings merely as a device for detaining them a minute within existence. For without this addition they would have every reason to flee this existence as quickly as Lessing's son.

      I've never heard or considered this perspective before. I don't necessarily agree, but very interesting and thought-provoking

    19. And just as every porter wants to have an admirer, so even the proudest of men, the philosopher, supposes that he sees on all sides the eyes of the universe telescopically focused upon his action and thought

      Wow, he certainly has a way with words. This is very lyrical and well-written, but in a snarky, "I hate the world an everyone in it", kind of way

    1. For prudence is not a moral virtue but a virtue of the intelligence and mind. Therefore rhetoric will not be a moral virtue.

      So part of rhetoric is prudence? It seems that we've read some things from rhetoricians that weren't very prudent

    2. Rhetoric should demonstrate the embellishment of speech first in tropes and figures, second in dignified delivery

      Once again, we see someone trying to define rhetoric as purely the art of public speaking with the intent to persuade

    3. The grammarian is defined as skilled in speaking and writing cor-rectly; he is not defined as skilled in speaking, writing, and singing. Why not? Because gram-mar provides no precepts about the last. The geometrician is not defined as skilled in mea-surement and medicine. Why not? Because there is no precept in geometry which teaches how to cure illnesses.

      He makes a good point here. To be a good orator doesn't necessarily mean that one has those esteemed characteristics. A good orator and rhetorician could could posses unsavory characteristics. Ex: Hitler, Mussollini

    4. dialectic, the mentor of speaking with truth and constanc

      So is he claiming here that the disticntion between dialectic and rhetoric is that dialectic speaks "with truth and constancey", and rhetoric doesn't?

    5. Yet I add the observation that if they had applied as many months as I have years to judg-ing these precepts accurately and to arranging them in order, I certainly do not doubt that they would have left us arts that are far truer and more distinct.

      Did Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintillion not study their craft for years as well? Is Ramus assuming that he studied rhetoric for longer than them?

    6. I wish I had not known the wretched-ness of wasting so much of my youth in this way

      I'm sensing some bitterness here.

    7. unwavering reaso
    8. we shall sep-arate its true properties, remove weak and useless subtleties, and point out the things that are miss-ing

      are we about to get an actual definition of rhetoric?!

    9. my close colleague Audomarus Ta-laeus cast light on style and delivery and pointed out their deficiencie

      Is this a text that still exists today? It might be interesting...

    10. rather I feel ashamed to look back upon them due to the very meager results they produced

      Interesting, and kind of sad, that he considers his discipline and work as a waste of time.