Up@dawn 2.0

Monday, March 19, 2012

Section 9 Group 3

Our topic on Wednesday was on the Scholastics. They spent their time studying other peoples works instead of going out and experiencing the world. One of the main texts they used was Aristotle's Sophistic Refutations, which was a study of fallacy: how words work and how they can be deceiving. They used Sophisms to hone one's truth finding skills. An example of a Sophism is, "This dog is your father." By studying statements like this they were supposed to establish the truth. I personally do not understand the point in anything that they did, and why they spent so much time studying these statements that essentially take you in a circle.

4 comments:

  1. I agree with what the group said. I also did not understand why they did what they did.

    Factual question: Is Scholasticism considered to be religious?
    A: No, not in the general sense.

    Discussion question: How do you feel about Scholasticism?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, with the Scholastics, I get that they were just trying to increase their understanding of the world. However, I just think they're like the "mouth-breathers" of philosophy. I can picture them sitting in a basement trying to out-nerd each other on how confusing of a clear point they can make, all the while not experiencing anything they're describing first hand. It just seems innately selfish, and I think philosophy is better than that.

    Factual Question: What was the name of Niccolo Machiavelli's controversial book? (The Prince)

    Discussion: Do you think Machiavelli's book was shocking because people were naive or because he was so blatant in speaking out against religious leadership?

    ReplyDelete
  3. The scholastics were all probably Virgos or Libras that worry way too much.

    Question: do the ends justify the means?
    Question: Did what happen in Machiavelli's book actually happen?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Philosophy does a whole lot of over thinking, and I think these guys win the gold. How is one supposed to find the "meaning of life" or what ever by starting somewhere that makes no sense. You must start somewhere common before you can venture into the unknown. No point starting out lost.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.