Difference between revisions of "Lit-Phil2014"

Revision as of 12:09, 6 January 2014

First day of class
What's lit. vs philosophy?
Literature is the art of written work
What's Philosophy?
Xaiver: The love of wisdom. DLR: Not knowledge. Xaiver: knowledge is just facts and organizing them, wisdom is experience and mistakes. It is basically taking knowledge and doing something with it. Nikoli: Facts=wisdom, truths=knowledge.
DLR: Knowledge is easier to gain than wisdom is, because you can just read the facts or use Google.
DLR: Return from literature. Lit. is things worth reading. However, some stuff worth reading ie textbooks are not worth reading.
Caplan: Literature are things worth reading for the purpose of obtaining wisdom with good style and content. DLR: What needs to be added to this? What aspects of style make something worth reading? How do you know that you are reading literature as opposed to reading fiction? Celia: Fiction does not have a very strong style, you need to have more meanings that are possible for it in order to be literature. DLR: Literature tends to have a somewhat self conscious use of language. "Close Reading" is an example of using this. DLR: What are the difference between these four: I am impoverished, I am poor, I am wretched, I am poverty-stricken. I.e. You can be poor and happy but you cannot be wretched and happy.
DLR: Here is an alternative interpretation of the distinction: Wisdom is result of the processing of knowledge and facts into some contextualization that improves the human experience. Sloan: Experience- you can learn from it and avoid it, and you can have empathy so you feel bad about it.
Homework: Read this book that alternates between chapter titles and numbers, read through page 24.
DLR: Distinction between empathy and vicarious knowledge?
Vicarious knowledge is learning about someones experience without doing it or learning it yourself.
Carl: You can read philosophy to figure out what you believe. That is to try to gain vicarious experiences to figure out how they want to live.
DLR: So what to do literature and philosophy have in common?
They mostly are different departments in book stores. DLR: Ask philosophy professors why literature and philosophy are so connected.
Xaiver: They both stimulate thought. Celia: They both have to do with understanding the human experience. DLR: To me that is the big one. Why/when is understanding valuable? Carlo: When you are interacting with other people. DLR: Yes, you need to have an understanding of how they will probably respond to what you say. DLR: When else? Jeffery: When you are trying to write literature. DLR: When is it useful to understand what it means to be human? Jake: Personal interest, intellectual curiosity. Fastow: To avoid confusion, to help you find your self. DLR: What happens when you put these together? It helps in the process of self discovery.
DLR: For tomorrow: When does this lead to happiness? Putting this all together, these overlap because they both tell you what it means to be human, and they all give you insights about human insights and possibilities. You could also try to transcend these definitions. In either case, it is good to know. The major difference is what? Xaiver: literature is inherently written for pleasure. Jake: Literature is more multipurpose, it is not only to gain knowledge. DLR: Both assume that the people they talk about are similar to everyone else. DLR: Philosophy tended to be didactic. Most philosophy tends to do what, even if not didactic? Carlo: To explain things persuasively. DLR: It purports to be explanatory as well as persuasive. Jake: In literature, there tends to be a story or a theme. Literature- the story itself is not usually the point that the author wants to convey.
DLR: "Art for art's sake" This is supposed to be a departure from using art to only teach lay people about god ie in the middle ages. This means that they were now making art for no outside purpose like art.
Dwight: Why is AGA less common w/ lit.?