Croce on collections of thoughts

By -
"Perché -- consideravo stamane sul leggere una raccolta di Pensieri vari -- perché simili raccolte, anche fatte da persone di non commune ingegno, riescono per lo più, in tutto o in parte, insipide e communi -- Gli è che la novità della situazione che c'ispira i nostri pensieri, troppo spesso c'illude sulla loro intrinseca novità. Tratti fuori di quella particolare nuova situazione, resta di essi agli occhi altrui sola la parte generale e vecchia; benché mantengano agli occhi nostri, pel ricordo appunto del fatto che ce li ha ispirati, un carattere di originalità. -- Pensieri Sull'Arte (1885), I

Because --  this morning I was considering reading a collection of varied thoughts -- because similar collections, also made by people of uncommon intelligence, become, for the most part, insipid and common -- The novelty of the situation that inspires our thoughts too often deludes us about their intrinsic novelty. Outside of the particular situation, these traits in other's eyes retain only their general and familiar aspects; although they keep in our eyes, because of the fact they inspired us, an original character.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more