A Brief Look at Paradoxes

I appologize for not posting a piece in a while, I have been busy. I am currently writing my own history of philosophy and religion. I understand this is a massive undertaking, but I at least want to complete the timeline, which I am close to doing. Also, for some reason my profile will not update in the views category. I know people have viewed it from new computors, I even looked at it from a computor that had previously not seen my blog and it still did not update. If anyone can help me fix this the assistance is appreicated.

But now for some new subject matter.

I would like to discuss my reasoning on paradoxes. My own definition has a flaw in it so I would like to use the definition from www.wikipedia.org, the english editionA paradox is an apparently true statement or group of statements that seems to lead to a contradiction or to a situation that defies intuition. Typically, either the statements in question do not really imply the contradiction, the puzzling result is not really a contradiction, or the premises themselves are not all really true (or, cannot all be true together). The recognition of ambiguities, equivocations, and unstated assumptions underlying known paradoxes has led to significant advances in science, philosophy and mathematics.

Note again this is not my definition, this is the wikipedia definition. Regardless it is a lucid definition. I would like the classify paradoxes into three categories. The first of these are questions that are puzzling but with logic and reasoning an answer can be found where an answer can be found. Another is when logic and reasoning is applied, it turns out that this is indeed a paradox, and cannot be solved. There is no clear logic that can find an answer for this, or remove its impossibility. The third type is the paradox where an answer cannot be found, and it is impossible to determine an which type of paradox this is. Ideally these types of paradoxes would not exist, but Godel proved that these indeed do exist. An example of the third type is the Riemann Hypothesis.

While paradoxes are intruiging there are not many practical applications for them. The greatest of these is the aformetioned Riemann Hypothesis where if solved it may spell the end of e-commerce. This is not close to being done, but I had an urge to post something. Thank you for reading and this post will be extended.

The Greatest Work of Art of All Time

While there cannot be a definite answer to what is the greatest work of art of all time, there are definitely come candidates. To be able to address this question, it is first prudent to define art. My definition in progress for art is any creative device that man has made that has an aesthetic value, but this is by no means the final definition. Dictionary.com defines “art” as “The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.” Now, to define greatness. Greatness is an mastery and proficiently genius and rises above almost every other thing in its same medium. Again this is a far from perfect definition but it is the best I can do for the present time. I would like to here say that this is a neither futile nor perfunctory task at determining the greatest single work of art of all time. It sets the standard for human creation and gives the criterion for man’s efforts at creating something beauty and ingenious.

This definition should be all encompassing. For this essay, works of art include sculpture, architecture, painting, music and literature. If there is a flaw here feel free to point one out. So, we must first define the greatest work of art in each of these mediums, and then compare them.

To begin with literature, it is not a bad idea to choose “William Shakespeare’s” Hamlet as the single greatest thing ever written. There are other candidates, for example the תורה, The Iliad, Paradise Lost, Ulysses, Finnegans Wake, War and Peace and a few others. Yet it is a safe bet to choose Hamlet.

Architecture is still art, but there is no single piece of Architecture that can compete in this competition, so it drops out. That leaves music, sculpture and painting. For sculpture there are two candidates in my mind: Rodin’s The Thinker and Michelangelo’s David. Personally I like the latter’s Moses, but I am in the serious minority.

For painting there are many more candidates. However, if we are to consider Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel, then that takes the prize for greatest painting. Yet for fun let us consider other candidates. The ones that come to mind, and yes they are also among my personal favorites, are Picasso’s Guernica, Raphael’s School of Athens, da Vinci’s Last Supper and Mona Lisa, and Botticelli’s Birth of Venus. Again, I am sure that I am at least partially wrong in this assumption, but that is the life of an amateur art critic.

Now for music. There is little consensus for what is the greatest single work of music of all time, so I would like to suggest come candidates. Bach’s Brandenburg Concertos cannot be ignored, nor can some of Mozart’s Sonatas, and Beethoven’s Symphonies. Tchaikovsky, Strauss, Wagner, as well as a few other composers cannot be ignored. However, the fact remains that there is no general consensus among the musical community for the greatest work. I know some will make a case for some of the Jazz works, a Beatles song or two as well as a plethora of others. But the fact remains that there is no agreed upon masterwork in the musical community. Note again that I am not a professional music critic or an art critic, and the only area where I have some serious knowledge and talent is in literary criticism, but I am adept enough to undertake this study.

So, it appears that we have narrowed it down to four candidates: Rodin’s Thinker, Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel and David, and “Shakespeare’s” Hamlet. For the sake of argument, I would like to narrow this down even more by disregarding The Thinker and David because their greatness in one disciple make it difficult to judge, so there is no masterwork in sculpture. While David is superior in intricacy and purely aesthetic beauty, The Thinker has more philosophical merit, and the image that is highly enduring. However, David is more recognizable. I guess a case could be made for its superiority over The Thinker but the latter cannot be ignored. Anyway this is my essay and I decided to disregard the two sculptures.

And we are left with Hamlet versus the Sistine Chapel. I bet if you were to ask Michelangelo which was superior he would claim that Hamlet was, but he would say that his David was superior to his Sistine Chapel and Hamlet. But how to examine Hamlet against The Sistine Chapel? This task seems almost impossible, but it must be attempted! From a humanistic perspective Hamlet is superior. From a purely aesthetic period, the Sistine Chapel is superior. From a story line, they are equal, but in creativity, Hamlet is superior. Granted, Michelangelo did not.compose בראשית (Genesis, I love using other languages, as you know), but the way he fit the scene on the ceiling was immaculate
Also, his final judgment was a clear work of beauty, and his incorporation was of the Prophets and mythology was breathtaking.

While this is about 1000 pages too short for a clear and fair explanation of what is the greatest work of all time, I would like to declare Hamlet the greatest work of art of all time in its Humanism, originality, beauty and creativity. This is not by no means the end, but I do have school to deal with (by school I mean doing literally everything in my power to go Ivy, or else life is pointless, but trust me I do not want to go on that rant right now), and I intend to finish this at a later date.

Note that this is an essay based solely on my perceptions of art, and I am sure an art critic could dismantle it, for I am not a professional art critic. However, the prompt is something to consider and I hope that I have at least gotten you to contemplate the topic.

Plato is Dead

Πλάτων απέθανον: Plato dies

Under the current flawed American educational system, intelligent students are not having their talents cultivated and there is little positive reinforcement to lead a fulfilling life. This opening sentence is one full of the passion and the massive disdain I have for the American school system. Ponder it, and prepare yourselves for justification in the coming days. However in this post I would like to address the fact that Americans no long are being versed in the Classics (by classics I mean Greek and Latin, in terms of language, and philosophy).

A few weeks ago I saw a book entitled something to the tune of “Why America Needs a Classical Education.” I have hitherto expressed similar sentiments and being as I am a student of Latin and Greek and have an immense passion for these subjects, I believe that all students should study at least elementary Latin. The classical tradition that nurtures free-thought and exploration would do wonders for the morale of the average student and open up a portal to the past that, for some, would never close.

Some students take Latin because they have been told that it would be good for them because it helps them on their SATs (it takes the strength of a thousand men to not make some snide remark or even subliminal comment about the Student Aptitude Test). Yet beyond etymological facilitation, the classics help one learn the structure of languages while simultaneously augmenting his vocabulary. It is true that most if not all students take some sort of foreign language in school, usually Español, Français, or Italiano. While one may become familiar with the language, it is rarely used conversationally, and few pursue it beyond their first few years of college. So all those years of studying a foreign language are for naught.

Another reason why a Classical education would ameliorate one’s high school experience is in the learning of a new language. Yes, I know the romance languages and English use the standard Latin characters, but Greek is a very different story. The Greek Language is comprised of twenty-four characters, many of which are new to those who have not studied the language, and the alphabet is a major obstacle for those who decide to take Greek. However, if one has studied another alphabet prior to this, Chinese, Arabic, and Hebrew, etc., the characters of the language become a minor formality.

But back to the core issue of why America needs a Classical education. The fact is that in the study of the Classics one learns where the other languages come from. They learn the history some of the Ancient world, and some of the major themes, war, persecution, prejudice to name a few, have not changed.

While this may be a personal issue, American students know virtually nothing about philosophy. Many claim to be knowledgeable on the subject the fact remains they cant distinguish between the Dialectical Materialism and the Socratic Dialectic. Introducing Americans to philosophy have a positive affect on their life, and it is ancient philosophy, as long as we do not make them study Plato and Aristotle too in-depth to avoid a skyrocketing suicide rate, will have a positive impact on students’ lives.

To recap, America would benefit from having all public school students having a class where they study the classics in terms of the language, history, and philosophy. This will open their eyes to past cultures an help them study modern languages. There is something that the classics have that the moderns do not. Yes it is true that I could have written this entire entry in Spanish. Pero es la verdad que más de los personas que lean mi blog hablan ingles tan los que hablan español. There may have been a grammatical error in there and I cannot wait for someone to correct my Spanish. However, the point remains that Latin and Greek are not spoken languages, they are studied languages. With Spanish, the goal is to be able to read, write, and speak it. With Latin and Greek, the aim is to learn how the languages work, and to read it some, but not to become fluent in it. Even the Church no longer endorses conversational Latin on a wide scale, if at all. So, the aim is completely different. Plus Latin and Greek can be incorporated into writing and vocabulary comprehension more than Spanish and the other languages commonly taught to high-school students. In conclusion, America would benefit from teaching the Classics to all of its students.