Knowing Good by Evil

Based on my last post, you may have expected that I would jump in to discuss John Milton considering my arguments seem to parallel many of the statements in Areopagitica.  Specifically, I like the statement that being “exposed to a wide range of ideas . . . strengthened the character of a reader” (99).  Milton adds an element to the argument that I feel is implicit in my argument but not necessarily called out directly: human error.  People may (and often do) misjudge the nature of a work or carry a personal bias which would have led to restricting the printing of a work.  Overall, I was really excited to see this section on Milton in the reading and could probably go on about the arguments as Standage shares them.

Certainly, our censorship struggles are not as harsh as they were in the 1500-1600s.  Unlike Stubbs (who had a rather unfortunately accurate last name), we don’t have to worry about having our hands cut off if we write and share something offensive; still, people seek to control and hide information that they don’t like.  Still, as an overall, chapter 5 expresses the many ways in which people manage to get around the rules to share and access information that they are interested about, such as the handwritten newsletters.

-

Thomas Fuller also brings about an interesting perspective in stating “the pamphlets of this age may pass for records with the next . . . and what we laugh at, our children may believe” (97).  This reminds me of when I took Comp. II to get my AA; one of our first reading assignments was “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift.  The majority of the class believed Swift’s argument to be genuine and quite a few people were unsure of how to interpret the “proposal;” only a few of us recognized that it was meant to be satirical.  While not every printed work is satirical, it does provide an interesting thought; our view of history is shaped primarily by the literature which may or may not be accurate to what actually occurred.  Just as half of my Comp. II class believed the people of 1729 Ireland were at least considering cannibalism, we might be fooled into believing particular things about the past that may not, in truth, reflect the culture or events.

(Post for 10-4-16)

Comments

[Dr. M]

Kendra:

Your final comment brings to mind Denise Schmandt-Besserat's comment that:

"It is fundamental of symbols that their meaning cannot be perceived either by the senses of by logic but can only be learned from those who use them. As a consequence, when a culture vanishes, the symbols left behind become enigmatic, for there is no longer anyone initiated into their significance." (CIH 5-6)

Losing the sense of context in which Swift wrote renders his words and intentions "enigmatic" to readers today.

Consider as well Tom Standage's remarks in the "Foundations of Social Media" chapter of WOW --

[Humans] "form coalitions with their peers, for example, and are capable of deliberate deception, which requires the ability to hypothesize about another individual's point of view of the world" (9)

Human communication, as we keep saying, is far more complex than the mere "exchange of information" -- which any two pieces of technology can do. It involves an assessment of the being on the other end, and ideas about moving that other being, influencing, moving to action, etc. This makes it essentially rhetorical rather than informational. It puts human being in the position of always wondering "what does that mean?" -- what was the person on the other end trying to do to me when he wrote/said that? Because we know that others are capable of deception, lying, fooling, dissembling, dissimulating, being ironic, sarcastic, satirical, playful, manipulative, etc.

Standage wants to argue that this typically human situation argues for the "social brain" theory --- that we are always hungry for social information about others. No just what information they hold, but their stance towards it and towards each other and towards us and towards the common values of the community, etc. We need to know who is being "straight" and who is being "ironic" and why. And we spend a lot of time gathering data on this and creating theories on these matters.

The Swift example shows what happens when we lose the ability/interest to engage in such efforts with humans from a different historical context. They are no longer "peers" to us and thus their words and intentions become "enigmatic."

One of the most important parts of a humanities education is that it essentially forces us to "friend" and "network" with the dead, so that their words do not become "enigmatic" to the present and the future. You discovered this week that your own argument is heir to the argument that John Milton made in Areopagitica in 1644. Congratulations. He has been returned to the realm of the living!

Grade: 3