Does Ibn-Rushd make a cogent point when attempting to relate classical philosophy to his contemporary Islam?
When trying to ameliorate ancient pagan philosophy with a rigidly monotheistic religion like Islam, Ibn Rushd was right to tread lightly. His approach to Plato is rational, and considering the society surrounding him, very radical. He viewed these texts as something closer to divine truth than anything he had seen before - aside from the Quran - and thought they needed to be heeded with the utmost urgency. His attempts to take the knowledge and wisdom of a very different system of thought into the contemporary socio-cultural powerhouse of the known world was as daring as it was revolutionary. The musings of Plato, and other classical minds had been criminally underutilized since the fall of a unified Roman Empire, and their new place in medieval Islamic thought lead to many advances in every measurable scientific field - truly vindicating Ibn Rushd.
How did this style of thought influence Europe in their immediate future?
The re-introduction of classical thought was perhaps the biggest single catalyst of the European cultural revitalization that characterized the later middle ages. Thought it lead to much intellectual schisms, the advances were responsible for significant jumps in scientific progress and the standard of living for a fair portion of the European population. Just the introduction of paper from the Islamic world into Europe lead to the single largest democratization (as it were) of information that the region had ever experienced. When taking into account the sheer amount of information that was transferred between the increasingly disparate cultural spheres, the debt owed by Renaissance Europe to the medieval Islamic world is tremendous.
Does this syncretism of religion and scientific thought have a place in the world today?
I feel that, whenever someone has found reason to seek out scientific rdings are beared out by empirically sound evidence, I couldn’t care any less who he gives his credit to. There’s nothing inherent in spiritual thought that prevents curiosity or intellectual discovery, as those things primarily stem from conservative social institutions. Divinely inspired discovery has marked the majority of human innovation, from those classical philosophers, all the way to people like Dimitri Mendeleev. Discounting the personal impact that religion has had on so many important scientific figures is wholly offensive to their collective memory.
According to The Decisive Treaty, philosophy is reserved for the demonstrative class. What does Averroes’ argument mean for the masses?
The main argument Averroes makes in The Decisive Treaty is that religion and philosophy/logical thought are compatible. He claims that there are three types of verses in all scriptures: passes that must be interpreted literally, passages that must be interpreted allegorically by the demonstrative class and ambiguous verses that do not necessarily fit either of these categories. In chapter 3 of the text, Averroes says that it is not the role of the demonstrative class to teach philosophy and allegorical interpretation of the Quran to the masses. He convincingly explains that the main aim of the Quran is to teach the masses and that the Quran provides teachings that appeal to the other two classes besides the demonstrative class (rhetorical and dialectical). To me the question is whether logical thought and philosophy are compatible for the rhetorical and dialectical classes? Averroes makes clear that only the demonstrative class is capable of learning philosophy; they cannot teach their wisdom or allegorical interpretations of scriptures to the masses either, “both he who expresses it and he to whom it is expressed are led into unbelief.” (pg. 66). Therefore, Averroes is claiming that logical thought and religion are compatible while at the same time saying that teaching it to the masses will result in their faith being shattered. This seems like a contradiction given that Averroes is basing his argument on the condition that the Quran is correct. He is saying that science, philosophy and logical thought can be used to interpret the Quran and better understand God yet he places restrictions on who ought to do this. If the masses cannot learn philosophy, how can it be compatible with their faith? The Quran itself can be taught to the dialectical and rhetorical classes but combining religion with science and philosophy is reserved for the demonstrative class. Averroes’s argument seems to only fully apply to the demonstrative class.
How do the “guardians” in The Republic compare to the demonstrative class? Many of Averroes’ arguments are similar to those of Plato. Both of them agree that philosophy should only be taught to a select few who are capable of learning such knowledge. A difference between the guardians and the demonstrative class is that Averroes makes no mention (at least in our assigned reading) about the demonstrative class being rulers. Plato clearly sees guardians as the philosopher kings who ought to be ruling. Another observation is that Plato seems to assign greater responsibility to the guardians that Averroes does to the demonstrative class. The guardians must “go back into the cave” and help those stuck there while Averroes argues that the demonstrative class should not teach allegorical interpretations of the Quran to the masses. The demonstrative class can be viewed as scholars or the intellectual elite whereas the guardians must be among the intellectual elite and have many other leadership qualities.
What roles do the gods play in The Aeneid? The gods try to manipulate the people to meet their own needs. In the first book, Juno wants Carthage to become the capital of nations. She has King Aeolus create winds that would make the seas rough to try and kill her enemies. But Neptune gets upset since this is his duty and intervenes. He calms the sea and Aeneas and seven of his ships make it to the safety of the land. The gods can even speak to the people. Venus speaks to her son, Aeneas. It mostly seems though that it’s fate that guides everything. Jupiter tells Venus that “Your children’s fate is firm.” (pg. 10 line 359) The gods and goddess can make things happen to the humans but their fate is already decided.
What is the role of women? Aeneas’ wife ends up dying in the attack on Troy but Aeneas is able to save his father and his son. She tells him that a new wife is waiting for him and that it’s basically fate. They so easily kill her off so that his Fate can be achieved. It’s kind of like in Medea. Jason marries Creon’s daughter to better his standing. In The Aeneid, Aeneas’ wife is killed so that he can fulfill his destiny as the creator of the new city with a better wife by his side. His wife doesn’t seem as important in the situation as his father and son are. Aeneas refuses to leave his father behind and his son is the future and can’t be left behind either. Goddess have a very important role in the story. They can manipulate the mortals how they please. Queen Dido is so kind as to allow the Trojans to stay in her land and doesn’t immediately force them out.
Were the Trojans stupid to let the horse into their city? It seems ridiculous that the Trojans would accept the “gift” of the horse from the Greeks. They were just battling them, why would they just leave behind a gift? That has to seem suspicious. Apparently it was to some of the Trojans. Laocoon says “Do you think that any Grecian gifts are free of craft?... Either Acheans hide, shut in this wood, or else this is an engine built against our walls to spy upon our houses or to batter down our city from above; some trickery is here. Trojans, do not trust the horse.” (pg. 31)What Laocoon says seems very logical to me and one would think that they would forget about the horse and send it away. It’s what happens later though that has more people questioning whether Laocoon was right. Laocoon ends up being killed by two serpents and a Greek boy ends up coming into the city. The boy tells the Trojans that the Greeks have gone away and left him. Through what the boy tells them about the horse and the way that Laocoon died, the Trojans believe the horse is an offering to the goddess and that they must bring it into their city. When looked at in that way, the reasoning behind bringing the horse into the city makes more sense. Fear of what they Gods might do to them outweighs the suspicion that they have.
I found Averroe's argument with choking on water to be very interesting. He made the point that if one man does something bad with philopsophy that the whole group of philosophers should not be punished and compared it to letting someone die of thirst because people have choked on water before. I think this concept can be put to use today with gun control. If you look at this from the logic of Averroes, just because some people do evil with a gun does not mean that the whole population should be restricted from using guns. Averroes made the point that the intellectual should be the ones to philosophize and it could be said that the people qualified to use a gun should be able to use one if he/she wants or needs to.
I also found it interesting in class when we pointed out the difference between someone that is using phiosophy to teach false things or things that others cannot comprehend being evil versus one that shares a philosophical finding with other scholars and is disproven but is not evil for being so. This is what happens today with science. From a psychological perspective, it is agaist the APA ethics code to report findings that are false to the public. Also, there are things such as the Belmont Report that lay down guidelines of ethics such as Beneficence which is to make sure one does more good than harm with findings, and Autonomy, which is respect for not only the people in the study but the public as a whole. Then when it comes to findings in the scholarly world, psychologist are constantly re-testing theories with converging operations to up the level of confidence that a theory has. If one is disproven, the psychologist does not get punished.
Why is Juno so resentful and angry towards Aeneas and the Trojans? What can you tell about Juno’s personality from this? What other gods take part in her revenge/who opposes her?
There is a prophecy that claims that there was a city of Tyre called Carthage that Juno favored over all others. She planned for this city to be the capital of nations (Book 1: Lines 24-29). But there was a race born from the Trojans that would destroy Carthage. She had a particular hatred of the Trojans because one prince, Paris, judged that Venus was more beautiful than Juno. Juno seems to be a vain and vengeful god from this, although many of the gods form this era seem to have characteristic flaws, which guide events on earth. It seems that the drama between gods has a large effect over the events of the earth and it would be a difficult task to keep them all appeased. Juno seems to be the most vengeful and vain since she is the queen of the gods and believes herself better than all the others besides Jupiter.
Juno asks another god Aeolus, the god of the winds, to release the winds across the south of Sicily where Aeneas is sailing. As a lesser god he obeys here and releases the winds from his mountain (Book 1: Lines117-120). Aeneas’ ship is tossed about and his small fleet is scattered, but just before his ship crashes into the rocks Neptune intercedes. It is interesting to see this interruption not because Neptune favors the Trojan men but because the sea was in chaos from the winds and he was not the one causing the chaos. Being a proud god he immediately calms the seas to reassert his power over the seas.
Neptune actually still resents the Trojans because Jupiter at one point had stripped his power and sent him to serve King Laomedon of Troy. The king had him erect a giant wall around the city and promised to reward him but never did. Neptune swore revenge and actually sent a sea monster to attack Troy later. This shows that Neptune is not as vengeful as the other gods and cares more about his domain and excercising his control over it. Although Juno attempts to discipline him he shuts her down and reminds her that it is his domain and is puts them in their place (Book 1: Lines 187-199). The calming of the seas allows Aeneas to steer his ship safely to Libya’s coast.
What deity is upset with Aeneas in the opening passage and why?
In the opening book of The Aeneid we find that the goddess Juno is upset with Aeneas. Juno, the patron goddess of Rome is the protector and counselor of the state. SHe has hatred towards Aeneas because Carthage is known to be her favored city in the empire and there is apparently an ancient prophecy that claims that descendants of Trojans will one day destroy her beloved city. I guess I wouldn't say she is personally upset with Aeneas himself, just Trojans in general, and as a byproduct, Aeneas because he is a Trojan. He must deal with her vindictiveness because as a result of the Trojan War, Aeneas was forced to flee Troy. He and his band of survivors attempt a dangerous journey to Italy to start fresh. Juno also has a personal vendetta against Troy because she is a vain and self centered. Paris, another lucky Trojan, declared Venus - a goddess who rivals Juno - the fairest and most beautiful. Because Juno apparently can't take a little competition she decides to hate all of Troy for this as well. Thus all this hatred rolls into one big snow ball and Juno asks a fellow god, Aeolus, god of wind, to bring a storm down on Aeneas and he does. Gee, what a peach that Juno is.
The book seems to open in the middle of some serious action. Why is that?
A common writing style - "in medias res" is being employed here. It translates to "in the middle of things." I remember learning about this in high school. It is a tactic used to get the reader swept into the action and the thrill of the piece immediately. You find the characters at an important junction of their story and are immediately sucked into their plight. This also allows for the history and back story surrounding events to become part of the narrative at later points.
In the Aeneid, Aeneas is fleeing the city of Troy, for it is in ruin after a war with the Greeks. Aeneas and the surviving trojans begin a journey to establishing a new city in Italy, but on the way, they encounter troubles caused by a vindictive Juno. Juno is upset because prophecy states that descendants of Troy will someday destroy Carthage, she was also jealous of her rival, Venus, for being judged fairest in a divine beauty contest. She asks the god of wind, Aeolus, to unleash a storm on Aeneas and his fleet as they travel to Italy. He obeys, and scatters the fleet, however, Poseidon becomes angry at the overstepping of boundaries by Aeolus and quells the storm before all is lost. While this is happening, Aeneas' mother, Venus, begs the king of gods, Jupiter to save her son, which he assures her. Divine intervention occurs on many levels in the Aeneid. Gods of different levels of power do their best to influence events and advance their personal interests.
What is fate in the Aeneid?
Aeneas' destiny is preordained and all of glories and sufferings are merely obstacles that delay the inevitable. Despite the interference of Juno and Aeolus, Jupiter was still able to deliver Aeneas to Italy. In the Aeneid, the power of fate appears greater than that of the Gods, or at least equivalent to Jupiter's.
Is Virgil a tad biased?
In Aeneas' retelling of the destruction of Troy, Virgil makes it point to emphasize that Aeneas is not less of a warrior than the Greeks. He also mentions that not all trojans were fooled by the horse ploy, because some elected to destroy it. Virgil is also meticulous in the details in order to unmask the lies and shadiness of the Greeks. Also, he even makes it seem that the trojans didn't bring the horse into their city out of stupidity, rather, it was because of their respect for the gods. Virgil does his best to minimize the foolishness of the Trojans.
Who is Aeneas and is he important so far in the story? Aeneas is one of the main characters in The Aeneid. Aeneas is a warrior who survived an attack that was made on his own city, Troy. Troy was attacked by the Greeks. After the attack Aeneas wanted to make the journey to Italy to form his new home. Aeneas is important because he is the protagonist and the whole story is centered on his destiny to rule in Italy. He is so important that even the Gods are willing to help him on his journey. An example of this is when Neptune calms the waters that Aeneas is sailing on. A quote that shows this is “So Neptune speaks and, quicker than his tongue, brings quiet to the swollen waters, sets the gathered clouds to flight, calls back the sun. (Page 6, Lines 200-203) Aeneas is probably the most important character in the story.
How do the Gods behave in this story? In my opinion the Gods in this story behave very much like humans. Obviously the Gods have and use powers that humans do not have but it seems like the Gods are still driven by the same things that drive humans. The Gods can sometimes seem overly emotional at times. One example of this is how Juno, the queen of the Gods, behaves. Juno actually told the God of the Winds to create a big wind storm. This seems human like mainly because she seems to be driven by her hatred toward Aeneas and in essence, Troy. I feel that Gods should be able to act above emotions like love and hate. These Gods however are very emotional beings. They act in the same ways that humans would act. This seems weird to me because Gods seem like beings that would be above humans. However, they behave in certain ways for the same reasons humans do. Gods in this story are very similar in behavior to the common people.
How is the structure of this writing different from other writings in the past? This writing is different because it is in the form of an epic poem. This is the first time that I have read an epic poem and so far I have found it to be a bit of a challenge. It is very different from other readings. The idea of one long poem is pretty interesting however. This poem is several thousand lines long and it tells a consistent story with a plot and developed characters. It tells a story just like any other reading however it is the form of a poem. I feel that the epic poem structure enhances the story in a way. The poem makes the story seem more engaging for me. It is long but it is one consistent poem. The structure of The Aeneid is fairly interesting to me.
Robert Lawton Averroes Does Averroes believe it is possible to disbelieve some of the scripture and still be spiritually pure? Is it possible to be religious and scientifically discerning according to Avveroes? This seems to be the core argument or thesis of Averroes. Just as Plato believed each person had an inherent talent that could be taught and perfected, Averroes believes some people have the ability to walk the middle ground between religious zealotry and agnostic scientist. Belief is not an antithesis for understanding the world in a demonstrative way. In fact, Averroes seems to say that only by understanding the scripture wholly can one understand too the world of science. These worlds coexist, in his belief, and to exclude one or the other in education and higher thinking is a detriment to the other. Science is about discovery and learning, understanding and explaining the unknown. The spiritual world of Averroes is much the same. However, he says we have been given the scriptures as a way to understand that unknown, unseen world of faith. If we approach the scriptures with a discerning wisdom, and have the ability to separate the allegorical from the concrete, if we can say “This I do not know” then we can grow as a person. Much as Plato believed in the Tripartite soul, or Christians the Holy Trinity, Avveroes looks at a triplicate world that exists in harmony awaiting discovery. If one can come to a spiritual understanding that there are forces beyond us that can be understood, and that we have been given the tools to understand them there is no dissonance. It is a unique idea that, unlike much of Christianity, accepts and even claims God as creator of not just spiritual but scientific man. This is a text from the 9th century, though and one has to wonder how this would still fit in with all of today’s modern advances.
The goddess Juno had a grudge against the Trojans for several reasons. The main reason why Juno resented the Trojans is because of Paris a Trojan. He stated that the God Venus is more beautiful than Juno, which obviously angered Juno. A prophecy predicted that the Trojans would one day take over and destroy Juno’s city Carthage. Obviously this was another reason for Juno to hold a grudge over Troy. One-way in which, Juno tried to get revenge, was by directing the God of wind to create a storm over the seas when the Trojans were sailing. However this plan back fired on Juno, when Neptune was aware of what was going on he stopped the storm and the Trojans were not harmed.
What was the importance of priest Laocoon’s death? When the Trojans were studying the giant wooden horse on the beach the priest was the only one who was thinking logically. He told the Trojans that the horse was not a gift and that it was trick of some sort, after pointing out that the wooden horse was hollow. After battling the Greeks for so long why would they leave a gift? Then the Greek Sinon comes into the picture claiming to be a Greek sacrifice. Sinon tells the Trojans that the wooden horse is a gift from the Greeks and it’s not a trick. Soon after, two serpents come out of the ocean and murder the priest and his two sons. The Trojans took this as a sign that they should bring the wooden horse into the city. Obviously, Sinon was lying and the wooden horse was filled with Greeks and during the night attacked the city. In my opinion, the Trojans were very idiotic. They were willing to listen and trust a so-called Greek sacrifice, over a knowledgeable priest that has been in their city for all of his life. Therefore, the Trojans should have seen the priest’s death as a warning sign instead of a gift.
How are non-deity women viewed in this story? While the Greeks were attacking Troy, the goddess Venus visited Aeneas and told him to leave the city instead of fighting. He listens to her and tells his family to go with him. Aeneas puts his father on his shoulders and grabs his son’s hand and flees to a safe spot in the woods, with Creusa, his wife following behind. Aeneas did not think to check to make sure that Creusa was still following them. She ended up getting lost and murdered before Aeneas even realized that she was missing. When he went back to find her, her ghost told him that it was too late to save her. However, he would find a new wife in the other city, so he should not be mournful. Clearly, Creusa did not show as much importance to Aeneas as the father or son did. Otherwise, Aeneas would have helped her out of Troy as well. It is also annoying to see that she can easily be replaced or traded up by a new wife in the different city. Therefore, women are viewed more as possessions than people.
Do we need to be atheist to be scientific? I do not believe that one must be atheist to be scientific. One of the main themes that run through The Decisive Treatise is that of harmony between religious and science. The difference that we talk about in this sense is that science can be proven and religion cannot necessarily be proven. Averroes makes the argument that the two ideas can coexist. There is a fusion of the religious, secular and scientific tones in this text, for example, Averroes talks about the Islam religion but does so academically. I believe that a person can be religious but still have a scientific perspective. Averroes believes that you can find a middle ground between religion and science.
How does this relate to evolution? Averroes’ argument of religion versus science reminds me a lot of the creation-evolution controversy. Referring to the debate between religion and science, I feel as though there can be a perfect blend between the two; just because you are religious, doesn’t mean that you cannot think of things in a critical or scientific sense. This applies to a religious person believing in evolution, it can still be done; there is a harmonious balance between the two.
Comparing Plato and Averroes’ views on censorship and supervision of reading and teaching practices. In Plato’s Republic, I viewed the censorship as propaganda, in a sense. The Guardians were only to read and learn “good” things about their environment, nothing “bad” or anything that could give them negative ideas. Averroes believes that not everyone can be taught, Plato believes that each child has a unique set of skills that must be utilized.
I found Averroes' “Decisive Treatise” interesting to think about considering the lack of respect combining religion and scientific thought has today. Averroes raises compelling ideas and connects, "...The link between the physician and the health of bodies is the same as the link between the Lawgiver and the health of souls..." so that his readers understand that both religion and science create a better and healthier human being. He continues a physician's idea of health in referencing that sometimes it isn't the fault of doctor that someone is sick, sometimes the information is just not used well which is the same for when some philosophical ideas do not work out as planned. Averroes treatment of mistakes is incredibly different from Plato's overall idea that everything must be controlled and only the best may continue to succeed. Averroes comparisons make him easily understood, if a little dry, and this makes his ideas applicable to life today unlike Plato's perfect society. Averroes descriptions of combining religion and science while accepting that some of these ideas must be protected from the uneducated in order to keep them as happy as possible seem fairly valid in order to have a high functioning society. Spiraling these people into a state of disbelief would negatively affect their ability to survive and mirrors Plato's cave argument.
Denis Jekić Dr. Akman HUMN 220 12th of March, 2013
1. How is it possible for demonstrative truth and scriptural truth to coincide without creating conflict?
Demonstrative is defined as something serving to prove the truth of anything; it is conclusive. If scriptural has to do with the idea of religion and the Gods, then the truth behind scripture can be defined as the self-expression of God, because the definition of truth comes and goes from God. According to Averroes, “truth does not oppose truth but accords with it and bears witness to it.” So, what this means is that if for example like Averroes states that religion is true and the summons to the study which leads to knowledge of the truth, it means that demonstrative study does not lead to conflictions with what scripture has provided. One must be able to view scripture in a metaphorical way rather than take it for what it literally states. If scripture is viewed as exactly what is written, of course it would be extremely difficult to assign any value of truth behind it because it is just too unrealistic and we as knowledgeable people know when something is not realistic and too fantastic. However, not everyone is a knowledgeable person as Averroes lets us know, so in order to keep from creating conflict, we must make sure that the people who aren’t knowledgeable learn how to use their abilities of analysis and interpretation so as not to wrongly view scripture and create conflict. Also, now that I think about it, if demonstrative is defined as something conclusive and used to prove the truth, if one uses demonstrative truth to prove scriptural truth, then scriptural truth would have to be true. Demonstrative truth and the ability to be a thinker and interpreter, one is called a Lawyer in Averroes Decisive Treatise, however unlike in some other similar writings, (Plato’s The Republic) the Lawyer is not the only one with this ability. Averroes says that even religious thinkers have this ability. One might not be able to do it immediately, but it can be learned and taught (although philosophical interpretations of scripture should not be taught to the majority, there are other methods of instructing the people).
2. What is the purpose of Scripture?
Averroes states that the purpose of scripture is “simply to teach true science and right practice.” He then goes on to explain true science as knowledge of God, Blessed and Exalted, as well as knowledge of the “other beings” as they really are. He also states that knowledge involves knowing of happiness and misery in the next life. Since the purpose is not only true science but also right practice, Averroes defines right practice as something that consisted of the act of bringing oneself happiness and avoiding acts that brought one misery. These two acts involve the science of asceticism (defined as abstinence from various worldly pleasures with the aim of pursuing religious or spiritual goals). This is not the only purpose to Scriptures, Averroes goes on to tell us that Scriptures teach “concepts both directly and by symbols, and uses demonstrative, dialectical, and rhetorical arguments.” The main aim of the scriptures is to teach the majority, which makes sense. Unfortunately, the majority is usually who falls prey to something so broad and something that is used as a crutch basically. It comes back to the fact that some people have the ability to see further into life than others. Those who do not often fall to something that can keep them up and end up following it blindly for fear of being alone and not having a clue as to how to progress with life.
In Plato's Republic, the character of Socrates makes the argument that since Gods are the highest form of being, they cannot be responsible for bad things and must not change shape, as they would have no reason to take the form of a lesser being. Therefore, according to Plato through the character of Socrates, any myth or story depicting Gods acting badly or changing form (such as the Homeric epics) would be banned in the hypothetical utopia of Kallipolis because they are untruthful. It seems then that Plato would certainly have a dim view of Virgil's Aeneid, which, in the same grand tradition as the Homeric epics, portrays the Goddess Juno (previously known as Hera in Greek works) as being full of resentment, jealousy and wrath and depicts her lashing out at Aeneus and the Trojans. These qualities and actions make Juno seem acutely human and imperfect in character, which would make her inconsistent with Plato's standard of Godhood. This problematizes the idea of Plato's republic as being a building block of western society, as the Aeneid was written a few hundred years after Plato's Republic and yet aspects of it are in opposition to aspects of the Republic. So it seems that rather than being a throughline stringing together the Greek, Roman and later European societies into the great imagined West, the Republic is a text that was not universally praised and put on a pedestal and was even forgotten for a time until Averroes, a Muslim scholar who is distinctly outside the Western tradition, began giving his ideas thought again.
Carthage in Africa
It's interesting to think about the fact that a large portion of Virgil's Aeneid takes place in Africa, since Ancient Carthage was located on the Northern coast of Africa. Virgil's Aeneid is obviously considered a part of the canon of Western civilization other wise we wouldn't be studying it, yet as was clearly demonstrated on one of the first days of class, Africa is a place that is definitely not part of the popular conception of the west. In fact, in my mind, I'd definitely put a large space between Greece and and Italy, both essential to the traditional idea of the west, and Africa in my mental map of the world. I had to actually look at a map to realize how incredibly close Greece and Rome, the foundations of the West, are to Africa and how it makes complete sense that these places would have and must have interacted. The fact that the action of the Aeneid, which I picture filled with the kind of stereotypical white marble statues of Greece and Rome come to life, takes place in modern day Tunisia, is something that takes some getting used to.
How do the writings of Homer and Virgil differ, and what is the importance of these differences?
The Trojan War is one that is highly written about, with poets like Homer and Virgil writing epics about the wars. Homer wrote the Iliad and the Odyssey, and Virgil wrote the Aeneid, all three describing the events that occurred during the Trojan War. Homer came before Virgil, and he was a Greek poet. Virgil was a poet from Rome, so they both had very different views of the war. Although they had different views, their writing style was very similar. They both opened up their poem by speaking to a muse. It is clear that Virgil was influenced by Homer’s style. Homer told the story of the war, but from a Greek’s perspective. He favored the Greeks, and he wrote the epic as an ode to the strength and intelligence of Greece. He spoke of how Troy was fooled by the Trojan horse, and they were superior to the Trojans because of their cleverness. This instance in the Aeneid is spoken of differently, mainly because Virgil was a Roman poet. He spoke of the Trojans also as intelligent and brave. His depiction of the events was that the Trojans were wary of the horse, and they wanted to inspect it. This would have happened, but the Gods did not allow so. The Gods killed Laocoon, who threw a spear at the horse in order to make sure that it was safe. The two writers depicted each side as the more intelligent, but there were things that were not to their control, like the Gods.
Does free will exist in the Aeneid?
Virgil depicted the story of a group of Trojans who escaped Troy before the imminent lose of the war. Throughout the poem, Virgil uses the theme of free will very often. This is usually seen in any form of writing that includes Gods in the story, because they control the elements of the Earth, but Virgil takes this one step forward. Although the humans in the Aeneid may not have free will, there is also a strong argument that many of the Gods in the poem also do not have free will. This is seen when Juno, queen of the Gods, calls upon Aeolus, the God of the winds, to cause a storm at sea in order to destroy the remaining Trojan people. Juno holds a grudge against the Trojans because there is a prophecy that states that one-day, the Trojans will destroy the city of Carthage, which is Juno’s favorite city. She also holds another grudge because Paris, a Trojan, judged that Venus, the rival of Juno, the fairest God of them all. She wants to destroy the remaining Trojans, but Neptune, the God of the seas intervenes when he sees the storm Aeolus is causing in his seas. Juno does not get her way, and the Trojans will eventually destroy the city of Carthage. Juno can no do anything, even though she has the powers of the Gods, to stop what is prophesized to happen.
What is the role of destiny in not only The Aeneid, but also The Iliad and The Odyssey?
Destiny is a huge part of The Aeneid, Iliad, and Odyssey. The question of whether or not a person or a God can alter destiny is an important question in a culture that believes in Gods and holds them with high importance. Destiny is seen played out in The Iliad and the Odyssey when The Greeks sneak into Troy through the Trojan Horse, even though when according to Virgil, the Trojans were wary of the Horse. It is also destiny that a few Trojans would escape Troy, and that they would become the Romans and form a large civilization. Not even the Gods can play a part in disrupting this destiny, as seen by the many failed attempts by Juno at stopping the Trojans. Destiny is an important thing to ponder during an age where Gods seemed to be the cause of everything. People would question whether or not they had gained anything on their own hard work, or they were just destined to become rich. This is a question still asked today, whether or not free will exists and whether we make decisions based on our own free will.
Reflection from class? I have to say, hearing the fact that Caesar was the reason that Vigil's work was published and not burned is extremely interesting. I mean, I know Virgil was well educated at an expensive school, which put him higher automatically than many others. The fact that Caesar personally told them not to burn his work is a pretty cool thing. What is my opinion of the grudge of Juno? I also found it interesting the grudge that Juno held against all those who are Trojan. It seems like such a petty thing to hold a grudge over. Paris, who was a Trojan, said that Venus was more attractive than Juno. At another point, it is mentioned that the goddess Venus is the mother of the Trojan. In my opinion, it makes perfect sense for someone to say their own mother is more beautiful than someone else. What did Juno do in carrying out her grudge? Juno made it extremely difficult for Aeneas to escape with his people and family. She had the god of wind try to blow them over while they crossed the sea. Eventually, Jupiter stepped in and stopped her, because she had gone too far in his territory. This, and Venus' guidance and help, managed to see them to safety.
Does Ibn-Rushd make a cogent point when attempting to relate classical philosophy to his contemporary Islam?
ReplyDeleteWhen trying to ameliorate ancient pagan philosophy with a rigidly monotheistic religion like Islam, Ibn Rushd was right to tread lightly. His approach to Plato is rational, and considering the society surrounding him, very radical. He viewed these texts as something closer to divine truth than anything he had seen before - aside from the Quran - and thought they needed to be heeded with the utmost urgency. His attempts to take the knowledge and wisdom of a very different system of thought into the contemporary socio-cultural powerhouse of the known world was as daring as it was revolutionary. The musings of Plato, and other classical minds had been criminally underutilized since the fall of a unified Roman Empire, and their new place in medieval Islamic thought lead to many advances in every measurable scientific field - truly vindicating Ibn Rushd.
How did this style of thought influence Europe in their immediate future?
The re-introduction of classical thought was perhaps the biggest single catalyst of the European cultural revitalization that characterized the later middle ages. Thought it lead to much intellectual schisms, the advances were responsible for significant jumps in scientific progress and the standard of living for a fair portion of the European population. Just the introduction of paper from the Islamic world into Europe lead to the single largest democratization (as it were) of information that the region had ever experienced. When taking into account the sheer amount of information that was transferred between the increasingly disparate cultural spheres, the debt owed by Renaissance Europe to the medieval Islamic world is tremendous.
Does this syncretism of religion and scientific thought have a place in the world today?
I feel that, whenever someone has found reason to seek out scientific rdings are beared out by empirically sound evidence, I couldn’t care any less who he gives his credit to. There’s nothing inherent in spiritual thought that prevents curiosity or intellectual discovery, as those things primarily stem from conservative social institutions. Divinely inspired discovery has marked the majority of human innovation, from those classical philosophers, all the way to people like Dimitri Mendeleev. Discounting the personal impact that religion has had on so many important scientific figures is wholly offensive to their collective memory.
According to The Decisive Treaty, philosophy is reserved for the demonstrative class. What does Averroes’ argument mean for the masses?
ReplyDeleteThe main argument Averroes makes in The Decisive Treaty is that religion and philosophy/logical thought are compatible. He claims that there are three types of verses in all scriptures: passes that must be interpreted literally, passages that must be interpreted allegorically by the demonstrative class and ambiguous verses that do not necessarily fit either of these categories. In chapter 3 of the text, Averroes says that it is not the role of the demonstrative class to teach philosophy and allegorical interpretation of the Quran to the masses. He convincingly explains that the main aim of the Quran is to teach the masses and that the Quran provides teachings that appeal to the other two classes besides the demonstrative class (rhetorical and dialectical).
To me the question is whether logical thought and philosophy are compatible for the rhetorical and dialectical classes? Averroes makes clear that only the demonstrative class is capable of learning philosophy; they cannot teach their wisdom or allegorical interpretations of scriptures to the masses either, “both he who expresses it and he to whom it is expressed are led into unbelief.” (pg. 66). Therefore, Averroes is claiming that logical thought and religion are compatible while at the same time saying that teaching it to the masses will result in their faith being shattered. This seems like a contradiction given that Averroes is basing his argument on the condition that the Quran is correct. He is saying that science, philosophy and logical thought can be used to interpret the Quran and better understand God yet he places restrictions on who ought to do this. If the masses cannot learn philosophy, how can it be compatible with their faith? The Quran itself can be taught to the dialectical and rhetorical classes but combining religion with science and philosophy is reserved for the demonstrative class. Averroes’s argument seems to only fully apply to the demonstrative class.
How do the “guardians” in The Republic compare to the demonstrative class?
Many of Averroes’ arguments are similar to those of Plato. Both of them agree that philosophy should only be taught to a select few who are capable of learning such knowledge. A difference between the guardians and the demonstrative class is that Averroes makes no mention (at least in our assigned reading) about the demonstrative class being rulers. Plato clearly sees guardians as the philosopher kings who ought to be ruling. Another observation is that Plato seems to assign greater responsibility to the guardians that Averroes does to the demonstrative class. The guardians must “go back into the cave” and help those stuck there while Averroes argues that the demonstrative class should not teach allegorical interpretations of the Quran to the masses. The demonstrative class can be viewed as scholars or the intellectual elite whereas the guardians must be among the intellectual elite and have many other leadership qualities.
Jessica Bourdage
ReplyDeleteThe Aeneid
What roles do the gods play in The Aeneid?
The gods try to manipulate the people to meet their own needs. In the first book, Juno wants Carthage to become the capital of nations. She has King Aeolus create winds that would make the seas rough to try and kill her enemies. But Neptune gets upset since this is his duty and intervenes. He calms the sea and Aeneas and seven of his ships make it to the safety of the land. The gods can even speak to the people. Venus speaks to her son, Aeneas. It mostly seems though that it’s fate that guides everything. Jupiter tells Venus that “Your children’s fate is firm.” (pg. 10 line 359) The gods and goddess can make things happen to the humans but their fate is already decided.
What is the role of women?
Aeneas’ wife ends up dying in the attack on Troy but Aeneas is able to save his father and his son. She tells him that a new wife is waiting for him and that it’s basically fate. They so easily kill her off so that his Fate can be achieved. It’s kind of like in Medea. Jason marries Creon’s daughter to better his standing. In The Aeneid, Aeneas’ wife is killed so that he can fulfill his destiny as the creator of the new city with a better wife by his side. His wife doesn’t seem as important in the situation as his father and son are. Aeneas refuses to leave his father behind and his son is the future and can’t be left behind either. Goddess have a very important role in the story. They can manipulate the mortals how they please. Queen Dido is so kind as to allow the Trojans to stay in her land and doesn’t immediately force them out.
Were the Trojans stupid to let the horse into their city?
It seems ridiculous that the Trojans would accept the “gift” of the horse from the Greeks. They were just battling them, why would they just leave behind a gift? That has to seem suspicious. Apparently it was to some of the Trojans. Laocoon says “Do you think that any Grecian gifts are free of craft?... Either Acheans hide, shut in this wood, or else this is an engine built against our walls to spy upon our houses or to batter down our city from above; some trickery is here. Trojans, do not trust the horse.” (pg. 31)What Laocoon says seems very logical to me and one would think that they would forget about the horse and send it away. It’s what happens later though that has more people questioning whether Laocoon was right. Laocoon ends up being killed by two serpents and a Greek boy ends up coming into the city. The boy tells the Trojans that the Greeks have gone away and left him. Through what the boy tells them about the horse and the way that Laocoon died, the Trojans believe the horse is an offering to the goddess and that they must bring it into their city. When looked at in that way, the reasoning behind bringing the horse into the city makes more sense. Fear of what they Gods might do to them outweighs the suspicion that they have.
I found Averroe's argument with choking on water to be very interesting. He made the point that if one man does something bad with philopsophy that the whole group of philosophers should not be punished and compared it to letting someone die of thirst because people have choked on water before. I think this concept can be put to use today with gun control. If you look at this from the logic of Averroes, just because some people do evil with a gun does not mean that the whole population should be restricted from using guns. Averroes made the point that the intellectual should be the ones to philosophize and it could be said that the people qualified to use a gun should be able to use one if he/she wants or needs to.
ReplyDeleteI also found it interesting in class when we pointed out the difference between someone that is using phiosophy to teach false things or things that others cannot comprehend being evil versus one that shares a philosophical finding with other scholars and is disproven but is not evil for being so. This is what happens today with science. From a psychological perspective, it is agaist the APA ethics code to report findings that are false to the public. Also, there are things such as the Belmont Report that lay down guidelines of ethics such as Beneficence which is to make sure one does more good than harm with findings, and Autonomy, which is respect for not only the people in the study but the public as a whole. Then when it comes to findings in the scholarly world, psychologist are constantly re-testing theories with converging operations to up the level of confidence that a theory has. If one is disproven, the psychologist does not get punished.
Alec Wolsiefer
ReplyDeleteHum 1
Blog #8
3/12/2013
The Aeneid of Virgil
Why is Juno so resentful and angry towards Aeneas and the Trojans? What can you tell about Juno’s personality from this? What other gods take part in her revenge/who opposes her?
There is a prophecy that claims that there was a city of Tyre called Carthage that Juno favored over all others. She planned for this city to be the capital of nations (Book 1: Lines 24-29). But there was a race born from the Trojans that would destroy Carthage. She had a particular hatred of the Trojans because one prince, Paris, judged that Venus was more beautiful than Juno. Juno seems to be a vain and vengeful god from this, although many of the gods form this era seem to have characteristic flaws, which guide events on earth. It seems that the drama between gods has a large effect over the events of the earth and it would be a difficult task to keep them all appeased. Juno seems to be the most vengeful and vain since she is the queen of the gods and believes herself better than all the others besides Jupiter.
Juno asks another god Aeolus, the god of the winds, to release the winds across the south of Sicily where Aeneas is sailing. As a lesser god he obeys here and releases the winds from his mountain (Book 1: Lines117-120). Aeneas’ ship is tossed about and his small fleet is scattered, but just before his ship crashes into the rocks Neptune intercedes. It is interesting to see this interruption not because Neptune favors the Trojan men but because the sea was in chaos from the winds and he was not the one causing the chaos. Being a proud god he immediately calms the seas to reassert his power over the seas.
Neptune actually still resents the Trojans because Jupiter at one point had stripped his power and sent him to serve King Laomedon of Troy. The king had him erect a giant wall around the city and promised to reward him but never did. Neptune swore revenge and actually sent a sea monster to attack Troy later. This shows that Neptune is not as vengeful as the other gods and cares more about his domain and excercising his control over it. Although Juno attempts to discipline him he shuts her down and reminds her that it is his domain and is puts them in their place (Book 1: Lines 187-199). The calming of the seas allows Aeneas to steer his ship safely to Libya’s coast.
What deity is upset with Aeneas in the opening passage and why?
ReplyDeleteIn the opening book of The Aeneid we find that the goddess Juno is upset with Aeneas. Juno, the patron goddess of Rome is the protector and counselor of the state. SHe has hatred towards Aeneas because Carthage is known to be her favored city in the empire and there is apparently an ancient prophecy that claims that descendants of Trojans will one day destroy her beloved city. I guess I wouldn't say she is personally upset with Aeneas himself, just Trojans in general, and as a byproduct, Aeneas because he is a Trojan. He must deal with her vindictiveness because as a result of the Trojan War, Aeneas was forced to flee Troy. He and his band of survivors attempt a dangerous journey to Italy to start fresh. Juno also has a personal vendetta against Troy because she is a vain and self centered. Paris, another lucky Trojan, declared Venus - a goddess who rivals Juno - the fairest and most beautiful. Because Juno apparently can't take a little competition she decides to hate all of Troy for this as well. Thus all this hatred rolls into one big snow ball and Juno asks a fellow god, Aeolus, god of wind, to bring a storm down on Aeneas and he does. Gee, what a peach that Juno is.
The book seems to open in the middle of some serious action. Why is that?
A common writing style - "in medias res" is being employed here. It translates to "in the middle of things." I remember learning about this in high school. It is a tactic used to get the reader swept into the action and the thrill of the piece immediately. You find the characters at an important junction of their story and are immediately sucked into their plight. This also allows for the history and back story surrounding events to become part of the narrative at later points.
What are the roles of the gods in The Aeneid?
ReplyDeleteIn the Aeneid, Aeneas is fleeing the city of Troy, for it is in ruin after a war with the Greeks. Aeneas and the surviving trojans begin a journey to establishing a new city in Italy, but on the way, they encounter troubles caused by a vindictive Juno. Juno is upset because prophecy states that descendants of Troy will someday destroy Carthage, she was also jealous of her rival, Venus, for being judged fairest in a divine beauty contest. She asks the god of wind, Aeolus, to unleash a storm on Aeneas and his fleet as they travel to Italy. He obeys, and scatters the fleet, however, Poseidon becomes angry at the overstepping of boundaries by Aeolus and quells the storm before all is lost. While this is happening, Aeneas' mother, Venus, begs the king of gods, Jupiter to save her son, which he assures her. Divine intervention occurs on many levels in the Aeneid. Gods of different levels of power do their best to influence events and advance their personal interests.
What is fate in the Aeneid?
Aeneas' destiny is preordained and all of glories and sufferings are merely obstacles that delay the inevitable. Despite the interference of Juno and Aeolus, Jupiter was still able to deliver Aeneas to Italy. In the Aeneid, the power of fate appears greater than that of the Gods, or at least equivalent to Jupiter's.
Is Virgil a tad biased?
In Aeneas' retelling of the destruction of Troy, Virgil makes it point to emphasize that Aeneas is not less of a warrior than the Greeks. He also mentions that not all trojans were fooled by the horse ploy, because some elected to destroy it. Virgil is also meticulous in the details in order to unmask the lies and shadiness of the Greeks. Also, he even makes it seem that the trojans didn't bring the horse into their city out of stupidity, rather, it was because of their respect for the gods. Virgil does his best to minimize the foolishness of the Trojans.
Colin Moore
ReplyDeleteHUMN 220
The Aeneid by Virgil
Who is Aeneas and is he important so far in the story?
Aeneas is one of the main characters in The Aeneid. Aeneas is a warrior who survived an attack that was made on his own city, Troy. Troy was attacked by the Greeks. After the attack Aeneas wanted to make the journey to Italy to form his new home. Aeneas is important because he is the protagonist and the whole story is centered on his destiny to rule in Italy. He is so important that even the Gods are willing to help him on his journey. An example of this is when Neptune calms the waters that Aeneas is sailing on. A quote that shows this is “So Neptune speaks and, quicker than his tongue, brings quiet to the swollen waters, sets the gathered clouds to flight, calls back the sun. (Page 6, Lines 200-203) Aeneas is probably the most important character in the story.
How do the Gods behave in this story?
In my opinion the Gods in this story behave very much like humans. Obviously the Gods have and use powers that humans do not have but it seems like the Gods are still driven by the same things that drive humans. The Gods can sometimes seem overly emotional at times. One example of this is how Juno, the queen of the Gods, behaves. Juno actually told the God of the Winds to create a big wind storm. This seems human like mainly because she seems to be driven by her hatred toward Aeneas and in essence, Troy. I feel that Gods should be able to act above emotions like love and hate. These Gods however are very emotional beings. They act in the same ways that humans would act. This seems weird to me because Gods seem like beings that would be above humans. However, they behave in certain ways for the same reasons humans do. Gods in this story are very similar in behavior to the common people.
How is the structure of this writing different from other writings in the past?
This writing is different because it is in the form of an epic poem. This is the first time that I have read an epic poem and so far I have found it to be a bit of a challenge. It is very different from other readings. The idea of one long poem is pretty interesting however. This poem is several thousand lines long and it tells a consistent story with a plot and developed characters. It tells a story just like any other reading however it is the form of a poem. I feel that the epic poem structure enhances the story in a way. The poem makes the story seem more engaging for me. It is long but it is one consistent poem. The structure of The Aeneid is fairly interesting to me.
Robert Lawton
ReplyDeleteAverroes
Does Averroes believe it is possible to disbelieve some of the scripture and still be spiritually pure? Is it possible to be religious and scientifically discerning according to Avveroes?
This seems to be the core argument or thesis of Averroes. Just as Plato believed each person had an inherent talent that could be taught and perfected, Averroes believes some people have the ability to walk the middle ground between religious zealotry and agnostic scientist. Belief is not an antithesis for understanding the world in a demonstrative way. In fact, Averroes seems to say that only by understanding the scripture wholly can one understand too the world of science. These worlds coexist, in his belief, and to exclude one or the other in education and higher thinking is a detriment to the other. Science is about discovery and learning, understanding and explaining the unknown. The spiritual world of Averroes is much the same. However, he says we have been given the scriptures as a way to understand that unknown, unseen world of faith. If we approach the scriptures with a discerning wisdom, and have the ability to separate the allegorical from the concrete, if we can say “This I do not know” then we can grow as a person.
Much as Plato believed in the Tripartite soul, or Christians the Holy Trinity, Avveroes looks at a triplicate world that exists in harmony awaiting discovery. If one can come to a spiritual understanding that there are forces beyond us that can be understood, and that we have been given the tools to understand them there is no dissonance. It is a unique idea that, unlike much of Christianity, accepts and even claims God as creator of not just spiritual but scientific man. This is a text from the 9th century, though and one has to wonder how this would still fit in with all of today’s modern advances.
Nicole Pfister
ReplyDeleteWhat Goddess resented the Trojans? Why?
The goddess Juno had a grudge against the Trojans for several reasons. The main reason why Juno resented the Trojans is because of Paris a Trojan. He stated that the God Venus is more beautiful than Juno, which obviously angered Juno. A prophecy predicted that the Trojans would one day take over and destroy Juno’s city Carthage. Obviously this was another reason for Juno to hold a grudge over Troy. One-way in which, Juno tried to get revenge, was by directing the God of wind to create a storm over the seas when the Trojans were sailing. However this plan back fired on Juno, when Neptune was aware of what was going on he stopped the storm and the Trojans were not harmed.
What was the importance of priest Laocoon’s death?
When the Trojans were studying the giant wooden horse on the beach the priest was the only one who was thinking logically. He told the Trojans that the horse was not a gift and that it was trick of some sort, after pointing out that the wooden horse was hollow. After battling the Greeks for so long why would they leave a gift? Then the Greek Sinon comes into the picture claiming to be a Greek sacrifice. Sinon tells the Trojans that the wooden horse is a gift from the Greeks and it’s not a trick. Soon after, two serpents come out of the ocean and murder the priest and his two sons. The Trojans took this as a sign that they should bring the wooden horse into the city. Obviously, Sinon was lying and the wooden horse was filled with Greeks and during the night attacked the city. In my opinion, the Trojans were very idiotic. They were willing to listen and trust a so-called Greek sacrifice, over a knowledgeable priest that has been in their city for all of his life. Therefore, the Trojans should have seen the priest’s death as a warning sign instead of a gift.
How are non-deity women viewed in this story?
While the Greeks were attacking Troy, the goddess Venus visited Aeneas and told him to leave the city instead of fighting. He listens to her and tells his family to go with him. Aeneas puts his father on his shoulders and grabs his son’s hand and flees to a safe spot in the woods, with Creusa, his wife following behind. Aeneas did not think to check to make sure that Creusa was still following them. She ended up getting lost and murdered before Aeneas even realized that she was missing. When he went back to find her, her ghost told him that it was too late to save her. However, he would find a new wife in the other city, so he should not be mournful. Clearly, Creusa did not show as much importance to Aeneas as the father or son did. Otherwise, Aeneas would have helped her out of Troy as well. It is also annoying to see that she can easily be replaced or traded up by a new wife in the different city. Therefore, women are viewed more as possessions than people.
Kelsey Davidson
ReplyDeleteHumn Blog 8
Averroes
Do we need to be atheist to be scientific?
I do not believe that one must be atheist to be scientific. One of the main themes that run through The Decisive Treatise is that of harmony between religious and science. The difference that we talk about in this sense is that science can be proven and religion cannot necessarily be proven. Averroes makes the argument that the two ideas can coexist. There is a fusion of the religious, secular and scientific tones in this text, for example, Averroes talks about the Islam religion but does so academically. I believe that a person can be religious but still have a scientific perspective. Averroes believes that you can find a middle ground between religion and science.
How does this relate to evolution?
Averroes’ argument of religion versus science reminds me a lot of the creation-evolution controversy. Referring to the debate between religion and science, I feel as though there can be a perfect blend between the two; just because you are religious, doesn’t mean that you cannot think of things in a critical or scientific sense. This applies to a religious person believing in evolution, it can still be done; there is a harmonious balance between the two.
Comparing Plato and Averroes’ views on censorship and supervision of reading and teaching practices.
In Plato’s Republic, I viewed the censorship as propaganda, in a sense. The Guardians were only to read and learn “good” things about their environment, nothing “bad” or anything that could give them negative ideas. Averroes believes that not everyone can be taught, Plato believes that each child has a unique set of skills that must be utilized.
I found Averroes' “Decisive Treatise” interesting to think about considering the lack of respect combining religion and scientific thought has today. Averroes raises compelling ideas and connects, "...The link between the physician and the health of bodies is the same as the link between the Lawgiver and the health of souls..." so that his readers understand that both religion and science create a better and healthier human being. He continues a physician's idea of health in referencing that sometimes it isn't the fault of doctor that someone is sick, sometimes the information is just not used well which is the same for when some philosophical ideas do not work out as planned.
ReplyDeleteAverroes treatment of mistakes is incredibly different from Plato's overall idea that everything must be controlled and only the best may continue to succeed. Averroes comparisons make him easily understood, if a little dry, and this makes his ideas applicable to life today unlike Plato's perfect society. Averroes descriptions of combining religion and science while accepting that some of these ideas must be protected from the uneducated in order to keep them as happy as possible seem fairly valid in order to have a high functioning society. Spiraling these people into a state of disbelief would negatively affect their ability to survive and mirrors Plato's cave argument.
Denis Jekić
ReplyDeleteDr. Akman
HUMN 220
12th of March, 2013
1. How is it possible for demonstrative truth and scriptural truth to coincide without creating conflict?
Demonstrative is defined as something serving to prove the truth of anything; it is conclusive. If scriptural has to do with the idea of religion and the Gods, then the truth behind scripture can be defined as the self-expression of God, because the definition of truth comes and goes from God. According to Averroes, “truth does not oppose truth but accords with it and bears witness to it.” So, what this means is that if for example like Averroes states that religion is true and the summons to the study which leads to knowledge of the truth, it means that demonstrative study does not lead to conflictions with what scripture has provided. One must be able to view scripture in a metaphorical way rather than take it for what it literally states. If scripture is viewed as exactly what is written, of course it would be extremely difficult to assign any value of truth behind it because it is just too unrealistic and we as knowledgeable people know when something is not realistic and too fantastic. However, not everyone is a knowledgeable person as Averroes lets us know, so in order to keep from creating conflict, we must make sure that the people who aren’t knowledgeable learn how to use their abilities of analysis and interpretation so as not to wrongly view scripture and create conflict. Also, now that I think about it, if demonstrative is defined as something conclusive and used to prove the truth, if one uses demonstrative truth to prove scriptural truth, then scriptural truth would have to be true. Demonstrative truth and the ability to be a thinker and interpreter, one is called a Lawyer in Averroes Decisive Treatise, however unlike in some other similar writings, (Plato’s The Republic) the Lawyer is not the only one with this ability. Averroes says that even religious thinkers have this ability. One might not be able to do it immediately, but it can be learned and taught (although philosophical interpretations of scripture should not be taught to the majority, there are other methods of instructing the people).
2. What is the purpose of Scripture?
Averroes states that the purpose of scripture is “simply to teach true science and right practice.” He then goes on to explain true science as knowledge of God, Blessed and Exalted, as well as knowledge of the “other beings” as they really are. He also states that knowledge involves knowing of happiness and misery in the next life. Since the purpose is not only true science but also right practice, Averroes defines right practice as something that consisted of the act of bringing oneself happiness and avoiding acts that brought one misery. These two acts involve the science of asceticism (defined as abstinence from various worldly pleasures with the aim of pursuing religious or spiritual goals). This is not the only purpose to Scriptures, Averroes goes on to tell us that Scriptures teach “concepts both directly and by symbols, and uses demonstrative, dialectical, and rhetorical arguments.” The main aim of the scriptures is to teach the majority, which makes sense. Unfortunately, the majority is usually who falls prey to something so broad and something that is used as a crutch basically. It comes back to the fact that some people have the ability to see further into life than others. Those who do not often fall to something that can keep them up and end up following it blindly for fear of being alone and not having a clue as to how to progress with life.
Liam Enright
ReplyDeleteAeneid
"Can such resentment hold the minds of Gods?"
In Plato's Republic, the character of Socrates makes the argument that since Gods are the highest form of being, they cannot be responsible for bad things and must not change shape, as they would have no reason to take the form of a lesser being. Therefore, according to Plato through the character of Socrates, any myth or story depicting Gods acting badly or changing form (such as the Homeric epics) would be banned in the hypothetical utopia of Kallipolis because they are untruthful. It seems then that Plato would certainly have a dim view of Virgil's Aeneid, which, in the same grand tradition as the Homeric epics, portrays the Goddess Juno (previously known as Hera in Greek works) as being full of resentment, jealousy and wrath and depicts her lashing out at Aeneus and the Trojans. These qualities and actions make Juno seem acutely human and imperfect in character, which would make her inconsistent with Plato's standard of Godhood. This problematizes the idea of Plato's republic as being a building block of western society, as the Aeneid was written a few hundred years after Plato's Republic and yet aspects of it are in opposition to aspects of the Republic. So it seems that rather than being a throughline stringing together the Greek, Roman and later European societies into the great imagined West, the Republic is a text that was not universally praised and put on a pedestal and was even forgotten for a time until Averroes, a Muslim scholar who is distinctly outside the Western tradition, began giving his ideas thought again.
Carthage in Africa
It's interesting to think about the fact that a large portion of Virgil's Aeneid takes place in Africa, since Ancient Carthage was located on the Northern coast of Africa. Virgil's Aeneid is obviously considered a part of the canon of Western civilization other wise we wouldn't be studying it, yet as was clearly demonstrated on one of the first days of class, Africa is a place that is definitely not part of the popular conception of the west. In fact, in my mind, I'd definitely put a large space between Greece and and Italy, both essential to the traditional idea of the west, and Africa in my mental map of the world. I had to actually look at a map to realize how incredibly close Greece and Rome, the foundations of the West, are to Africa and how it makes complete sense that these places would have and must have interacted. The fact that the action of the Aeneid, which I picture filled with the kind of stereotypical white marble statues of Greece and Rome come to life, takes place in modern day Tunisia, is something that takes some getting used to.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHow do the writings of Homer and Virgil differ, and what is the importance of these differences?
ReplyDeleteThe Trojan War is one that is highly written about, with poets like Homer and Virgil writing epics about the wars. Homer wrote the Iliad and the Odyssey, and Virgil wrote the Aeneid, all three describing the events that occurred during the Trojan War. Homer came before Virgil, and he was a Greek poet. Virgil was a poet from Rome, so they both had very different views of the war. Although they had different views, their writing style was very similar. They both opened up their poem by speaking to a muse. It is clear that Virgil was influenced by Homer’s style.
Homer told the story of the war, but from a Greek’s perspective. He favored the Greeks, and he wrote the epic as an ode to the strength and intelligence of Greece. He spoke of how Troy was fooled by the Trojan horse, and they were superior to the Trojans because of their cleverness. This instance in the Aeneid is spoken of differently, mainly because Virgil was a Roman poet. He spoke of the Trojans also as intelligent and brave. His depiction of the events was that the Trojans were wary of the horse, and they wanted to inspect it. This would have happened, but the Gods did not allow so. The Gods killed Laocoon, who threw a spear at the horse in order to make sure that it was safe. The two writers depicted each side as the more intelligent, but there were things that were not to their control, like the Gods.
Does free will exist in the Aeneid?
Virgil depicted the story of a group of Trojans who escaped Troy before the imminent lose of the war. Throughout the poem, Virgil uses the theme of free will very often. This is usually seen in any form of writing that includes Gods in the story, because they control the elements of the Earth, but Virgil takes this one step forward. Although the humans in the Aeneid may not have free will, there is also a strong argument that many of the Gods in the poem also do not have free will. This is seen when Juno, queen of the Gods, calls upon Aeolus, the God of the winds, to cause a storm at sea in order to destroy the remaining Trojan people. Juno holds a grudge against the Trojans because there is a prophecy that states that one-day, the Trojans will destroy the city of Carthage, which is Juno’s favorite city. She also holds another grudge because Paris, a Trojan, judged that Venus, the rival of Juno, the fairest God of them all. She wants to destroy the remaining Trojans, but Neptune, the God of the seas intervenes when he sees the storm Aeolus is causing in his seas. Juno does not get her way, and the Trojans will eventually destroy the city of Carthage. Juno can no do anything, even though she has the powers of the Gods, to stop what is prophesized to happen.
What is the role of destiny in not only The Aeneid, but also The Iliad and The Odyssey?
Destiny is a huge part of The Aeneid, Iliad, and Odyssey. The question of whether or not a person or a God can alter destiny is an important question in a culture that believes in Gods and holds them with high importance. Destiny is seen played out in The Iliad and the Odyssey when The Greeks sneak into Troy through the Trojan Horse, even though when according to Virgil, the Trojans were wary of the Horse. It is also destiny that a few Trojans would escape Troy, and that they would become the Romans and form a large civilization. Not even the Gods can play a part in disrupting this destiny, as seen by the many failed attempts by Juno at stopping the Trojans. Destiny is an important thing to ponder during an age where Gods seemed to be the cause of everything. People would question whether or not they had gained anything on their own hard work, or they were just destined to become rich. This is a question still asked today, whether or not free will exists and whether we make decisions based on our own free will.
Reflection from class?
ReplyDeleteI have to say, hearing the fact that Caesar was the reason that Vigil's work was published and not burned is extremely interesting. I mean, I know Virgil was well educated at an expensive school, which put him higher automatically than many others. The fact that Caesar personally told them not to burn his work is a pretty cool thing.
What is my opinion of the grudge of Juno?
I also found it interesting the grudge that Juno held against all those who are Trojan. It seems like such a petty thing to hold a grudge over. Paris, who was a Trojan, said that Venus was more attractive than Juno. At another point, it is mentioned that the goddess Venus is the mother of the Trojan. In my opinion, it makes perfect sense for someone to say their own mother is more beautiful than someone else.
What did Juno do in carrying out her grudge?
Juno made it extremely difficult for Aeneas to escape with his people and family. She had the god of wind try to blow them over while they crossed the sea. Eventually, Jupiter stepped in and stopped her, because she had gone too far in his territory. This, and Venus' guidance and help, managed to see them to safety.
OOPS! I meant Neptune.
Delete