Progress and Philosophy
So I'm a month into my project of studying the classics. Half the battle in such a project is deciding just what are the classics anyway? There is no master list, at least not one that "everyone" agrees on. I'm starting with the list from A Thomas Jefferson Education just as a guide (though I'm sure as I go along I'll either add books or skip some of the ones that DeMille suggests). Figuring that I'm a fast reader, I requested about a half dozen of these classics from my local library.
Oops. I didn't take into account just how LONG some of these books were. Or that they are not exactly quick and easy reading. Or the fact that I would go mad if all I read were books written decades (or centuries) before I was born and completely abandoned my current passion for good YA fiction.
Anyway, after a month of diligent study I am now about 58% the way through Democracy in America (I'm tracking my progress on Goodreads). I'm finding it fascinating but not easy reading by any means. Plus I had all these other classics that came in at the same time from the library. I ended up turning the Copernicus back in. It was even longer that D. in A. and there was just no point in keeping it when I wasn't go to get to it in time. However, I tackled the Allen Bloom book The Closing of the American Mind and The Lonesome Gods by Louis L'Amour, both also from the classics list. The Lonesome Gods was great! I'd never read a western before-- or at least a novel officially identified as a western-- and I found it quite enjoyable and not difficult at all. It was a pleasant alternative to The C.of the A.M. Ugh. It started off interesting; Bloom was skewering the ivory towers of our culture and universities and since I know that stuff is broken already, it was just entertaining (not enraging, as some readers apparently found it). However, Bloom was into philosophy and he spends a good half of the book talking about philosophers, summarizing their theories, and generally rhapsodizing about philosophy.
I hate philosophy.
When I figured out (halfway through the book) that Bloom was going to give me a lecture on philosophy, I tried to keep an open mind. I tried to remind myself that the people he was quoting wrote books that are on my classics lists, and I should be willing to learn from them. I was familiar with some of them by name at least (Kant, Descartes, Rousseau, Plato, Aristotle), though I didn't have a clue what any of them had taught, not really. Whenever we had read philosophy in school (usually extracts), I loathed it, so nothing had stayed in my head. But this time, I waded in with enthusiasm, figuring my loathing had been childish and unfounded, and it would be different now that I'm middle-aged.
Not so. I still loathe it. Or at least I abhorred having to read several hundred pages reviewing it and applying it to American culture.
I'm going to strike out on a limb here and offer up my own philosophy about why I don't feel any desire to delve into philosophy. It's because I have the gospel in my life. I don't have any deep need to make sense of the universe, either through logic or science or natural feelings. I have no need to use reason to try to deduce "truth." I don't need to stare death in the face unflinchingly and determine the possibility of my existence. I know I exist. I know why I exist.
There is no hole in me, longing to make sense of humans and discover if we have souls.
But I'll agree with Bloom on this-- America would be a richer place if more people did ask that question, and try to answer it sincerely. So, have you thought about it recently? What ARE we? Do we have souls? What is the point of our existence?
The answer might just change how you approach your life. Just reconsidering it myself (all that philosophy did sink in a bit, had to after a gazillion pages of it), I'm approaching my time here just a little different. Some perspective is a good thing!
Oops. I didn't take into account just how LONG some of these books were. Or that they are not exactly quick and easy reading. Or the fact that I would go mad if all I read were books written decades (or centuries) before I was born and completely abandoned my current passion for good YA fiction.
Anyway, after a month of diligent study I am now about 58% the way through Democracy in America (I'm tracking my progress on Goodreads). I'm finding it fascinating but not easy reading by any means. Plus I had all these other classics that came in at the same time from the library. I ended up turning the Copernicus back in. It was even longer that D. in A. and there was just no point in keeping it when I wasn't go to get to it in time. However, I tackled the Allen Bloom book The Closing of the American Mind and The Lonesome Gods by Louis L'Amour, both also from the classics list. The Lonesome Gods was great! I'd never read a western before-- or at least a novel officially identified as a western-- and I found it quite enjoyable and not difficult at all. It was a pleasant alternative to The C.of the A.M. Ugh. It started off interesting; Bloom was skewering the ivory towers of our culture and universities and since I know that stuff is broken already, it was just entertaining (not enraging, as some readers apparently found it). However, Bloom was into philosophy and he spends a good half of the book talking about philosophers, summarizing their theories, and generally rhapsodizing about philosophy.
I hate philosophy.
When I figured out (halfway through the book) that Bloom was going to give me a lecture on philosophy, I tried to keep an open mind. I tried to remind myself that the people he was quoting wrote books that are on my classics lists, and I should be willing to learn from them. I was familiar with some of them by name at least (Kant, Descartes, Rousseau, Plato, Aristotle), though I didn't have a clue what any of them had taught, not really. Whenever we had read philosophy in school (usually extracts), I loathed it, so nothing had stayed in my head. But this time, I waded in with enthusiasm, figuring my loathing had been childish and unfounded, and it would be different now that I'm middle-aged.
Not so. I still loathe it. Or at least I abhorred having to read several hundred pages reviewing it and applying it to American culture.
I'm going to strike out on a limb here and offer up my own philosophy about why I don't feel any desire to delve into philosophy. It's because I have the gospel in my life. I don't have any deep need to make sense of the universe, either through logic or science or natural feelings. I have no need to use reason to try to deduce "truth." I don't need to stare death in the face unflinchingly and determine the possibility of my existence. I know I exist. I know why I exist.
There is no hole in me, longing to make sense of humans and discover if we have souls.
But I'll agree with Bloom on this-- America would be a richer place if more people did ask that question, and try to answer it sincerely. So, have you thought about it recently? What ARE we? Do we have souls? What is the point of our existence?
The answer might just change how you approach your life. Just reconsidering it myself (all that philosophy did sink in a bit, had to after a gazillion pages of it), I'm approaching my time here just a little different. Some perspective is a good thing!
Comments