Thinking theoretically, literature’s importance is answered through the questions it posits. Synonymous with critical theory, Frankfurt didn’t penetrate the school of thought until the 20th century, besides I am concerned with the ontology of literature and not an official opposition to the institution thereof. Ontology, from the philosophical sense, includes the most rigid (ie. concrete) aspects of the metaphysics. From a computer science perspective, ontology is the nodal and conceptual framework in, for example, this website. I show elsewhere that the former and the latter are sui generis. This article will focus on the philosophical as well as provide the biological framework as supporting evidence and structure. Together, the context of the example epitomizes the deliberate rhetoric merging cognitive science with philosophy. This is also a thesis of the p.(x) philosophy.
Plato believed mimesis to be less than ideal, Charles Caleb Colton, on the other hand, uses imitation in its sincerest form to flatter. With function over forme, we acknowledge the disarming quality of this rhetorical approach. Suspending the goodness principle, the Hellenic suffers from the incongruent and the eudaemonia it elicits. Like Aristotle, we also possess the hubris of categorizing imitation as beneficial. Perhaps this is the foundation of my self-professed romanticism.
Using the P.A.S.F. filter, I often remove instances of Socrates and Plato (S&P multiplier) as well as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle combined (S.P.A. multiplier) for purposes of perspective. We see different relationships, patterns of people, and bipartisan thoughts. I must remind my peers that I am a product of Western Philosophy, and defend it as such. “In relation to Plato & Socrates,” or, “based on the trial of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle,” are presuppositions to the data. According to Whitehead; footnotes. Expressive theories are reflections of the self. Sophist for sure. Didactic versus prophetic was the norm. Now didactic is paired with Big Data. Teach pattern recognition! Teach correlations and algorithms!! But do NOT abandon reason and the rubrics of a civilized society our culture of causation. Advocate for an upgrade in personal data, a Liberty upgrade. Our data should make all our lives better and worth living.
Objective theory places the poet in a microcosm, whereas Plato’s concept of mimesis prevented poets from joining the Republic.
Mimetic within the Universe
Pragmatic for the Audience
Expressive of the Self
Objective of Itself
- Will Freeman
The poets were not welcome, accused of spreading unreliable truth, they were banished! In our world of becoming, Plato taught us that we are stuck in time. One-to-one representation between becoming and being. Striving for the form or the ideal was the only path to being. An imitation stacked on top of an imitation is Art, according to Plato, twice removed from reality. Again, an unreliable truth. My responsion would start with the observation poetry and art are not black and white. Truth does not imply the absolute. Individual interpretations necessitate duality. The wholeness of one is defined by the data of a species, this is our implicate order.
Aristotle put poetry on a pedestal. Closer to truth through mimesis, through imitation. Pent-up emotions erupt, better to voice these concerns in the open. Art acts as a cleanse, resolving unresolved emotions. Appeasing the irrational already sounds like a shift in the direction of theology. Appeasing the gods or logic. In Aristotle we are in good hands, logic prevails. Imitations, however, not so much. Catharsis started with Aristotle and remains deep within psychoanalysis, a release from the anxieties of society. Quite remarkable the Aristotelian theory of catharsis, two millennia in the making. Overcoming pity and fear is loathing in itself. Cathartic is the act of doing. Purging from proximity, the potential of pity or the thought of fear propels the person into purification. The counter-culture vultures circle overhead some years later. An ends to their own means. Hellenism was their bridge to the West. They never looked back. You can. Leaders led by Logic, supported by a leisure class and a class of Bohemia provides a function for all the individual forms to follow. Losing the loving pursuit of Truth or silencing academia disrupts the function of many forms.
“The purpose of the Platonic dialectic is to pierce through the ephemeral world of Becoming into the realm of Being.”
- Dr Cory Elliot, (fictional phenomenon)
Giordano Bruno’s heresy was mnemonic. Monumental and manifest, as in Spinoza’s pantheism, the Synthesis-Synapse produced us, as we are, in body, mind and whatever else you want to add to that. Our totality makes up the whole. Except the holy. Throw this water out with the baby. Jesus! Why so harsh? Absolutely no proof. Not one shred of evidence to the contrary. Take what on faith? If Jesus is a fiction do you still believe? That’s a big leap of faith. No matter how far your leap of faith is, Science is but one atom away. A comforting thought. Talk about universal acceptance and understanding, that’s a reality you can count on. Mathematically and emotionally. Mimesis of Plato’s first degree and compatible with the Aristotelian administration. Am I being too harsh our our hippy Savior? As with other religions they teach us what not to do and in that regard some credit is due. Spinoza’s god had one Einsteinian disciple to be sure. Unattainable I assert. Entropy makes all data unknowable. Big Data, however, is a close second. The bigger the better. If you want to liberate yourself in the new paradigm of information ask how? How can this Big Data be used to better sentient being? How can algorithms improve your life? How can personal data give you more freedom or increase your ability to engage in society? Truth isn’t the only path to prosperity, it’s rather secondary to survival.
There is a glaring hole that should be obvious at this point, the movement towards Plato's ideal or forme is, for me, a valid metaphysical dimension to the realities we in habit. As language animals we don't think in language, we think into language. There is a directionality to the thought, vectors of "will". The p.(x) and Will Freeman run counterpoint. The p.(x) slanted towards deterministic realities while the fictional phenomenon that his Will Freeman will free man. Or will it? A new forme of compatibilism, epiphenomenaly so!