Other Socrates but same way

The other Socrates is a philosopher with same name of more famous philosopher, may the first master of Aristotle, he is inserted from Plato(b.Ch.427-347) in dialogue of Sophist, it is the dialogue that encloses this other Socrates that certainly Plato has used for the name, since Plato has inserted in every his dialogue his master, Socrates(b.Ch.469-399); and Socrates gives to a member of dialogue a question, this member is a foreign, Socrates asked regard to way for to search the knowledge: “When do you explain  that you want demonstrate, are you usual speak you alone…or do you prefer give the precise question?”, and the foreign answers: “If is an interlocutor that is able of follow the dialogue is better, it is certain; but the contrary case I speak alone”; it is the philosophical habit of Socrates, that the foreign continues: “Dear Socrates it is the first time that I meet you and I don’t want leave occasion for a close confront, word to word…”; it is the method of Socrates that Plato, a his pupil, has known very well; in fact in this dialogue the foreign says to Theaetetus, a member of dialogue regard to method  necessary to inquiry the greater things is necessary begin from the small things, he asks to Theaetetus: “Do you want that we search an easy argument…and equally it needs of a right think, we consider the fisherman with fisher line…”; it is the Socratic simplicity, that from very easy matter he came to complicate matter; it is the diaretic way; it is a method that certainly Socrates has used, what is? Simple a subdivision of a elementary concept, that is divided  among the species his gender, this is the division of common gender, for example the humanity, that we find also in women, because also they are human gender; hence the human gender is divided between two species, and the relation between these two gender are evident; if we think the human nature that is common twice, men and women. The dialogue through the diaretical method follows his course, and Socrates uses the logic think, and he divided the fisherman from the other hunter, this is the Sophistic hunter, this is the hunter of men, it is the difference from the fisherman and the sophistic philosopher, that hunts the domestic animals this is the men; it is one reflex of the despise of Socrates to the Sophistic school, that in Apologize, this is the discourse of Socrates in court fro his defense, he hinted to philosophers that are paid  fro to sale the knowledge , this is the sophistic, in fact the foreign says that the technique of persuasion that was the way used form the Sophistic school. This dialogue is, in short,  the following  of Socrates’s accuse to Sophistic school. And the confirm of this thesis is in following words: “These is also the other side, that making profession of a determined competence it stablishes rapports that are for the teaching of virtue , but alone for to gain money. Also this side we must distinguish through a name.”, and Theaetetus answer: “Yes certain”, and the Foreign. “What name? you say it”, and the Theaetetus: “it is clear. I think that we are managed to find the sophist, and I am saying so I think that I name tit through the fit name.”; hence the polemical matter is right.    

 Alessandro Lusana    

                                     American Nietzsche: Emerson

Ralph Emerson(1803-1882)certainly isn’t a reference for the night reading, because is low known and his think, above all today, can be very noise, because he as Nietzsche(1844-1900), he says the truth, he describes the our behaviors and he shows our hypocrisies, and he opposed to this hypocrisy the truth of speculation, speculative examination of our conduct, he says: “Instead, I don’t desire expire but to life. The my life isn’t an apologize; it is my life. I live for myself, and no for to give the show of my existence, I prefer that it is a tenor more modest so that it is homogeneous and natural. I would it sorrowful and sweet, of dolor and joy of wealth low curing; for it would be equilibrated, and everything enclosed: charity, conquer, hygiene…”; it is the new vision of the life that evidently Emerson have to live, the imposition of rules of society that he refused. The explication to these words is in the following step: “The virtue in the popular opinion  are the exception rather than the rule…The men make the good actions for to give a proof of their courage and their charity; and it is often, as they were condemned to pay a penitence, for to expire the not daily appearance to some function…”; it is the description of hypocrisy in the society that today is valid; but it is also the concept that Nietzsche has expressed; he in the his book, So said Zarathustra, he has explained, although through the allusions the concept of superman, this is the man that is came out from the common hypocrisy and has said the truth. Other step is very indicative: “The my duty and not the common opinion of men: it is regard me…”; it is the truth that Emerson has said about the society that he has lived. The proof of this think and opinion is in the following step: “To be conform to customs that for you there aren’t, it is the motive for the dispersion of your force; you waste so your time and delete you character…”, he describes the customs that in his society were normal, and: “The man should know how the uselessness this play of conformity”. The pitiless description continues: “After this servile conformity, other motive that remove us from the faith to ourselves  ids the persistence , it is the respect for our actions and for the past our words: other men haven’t other motive, beyond the our actions, we would go desolate and disabused. But why do you bring on the shoulders a head again thinking? And why do you bring this heap of your memory, for the fair of contradict some opinion that you have said in this or other town?”; we can consider that it isn’t virtue but alone coherence, but that Emerson sees alone as a custom of his society, where the morality and the image were everything. Regard not understanding, he says: “It is so very bad not be understanding? Pythagoras not was understanding, neither Socrates, neither Jesus, neither Luther…”; may this reference to so great personages we can think that Emerson wanted refer also to herself, because this think about the morality was very strange for the 19^th century; hence an auto reference is certainly.

Alessandro Lusana  

 The speculative Emerson

The Character and the human life of Ralph Emerson(1803-1882) is a speculative examination of the human life and description of behaviour that we have, fro example: “The indifference of childs, that, sure of launch, resufe as the king say of make something for the consens of somebody; this is the healty attitude of human nature. The child is the patron of society; indipendent, irresponsable, he looks about him the men and mades of society, he judges them…he calls them good, wicked, interesting, loquace, useless, nuisance…”; it is the description of childhood that veverybody has past. Other description regard the humankind is the following: “The man is prisoner of his conscience that he has of herself. If he has made or spooken cloud, he is a compromissed person, supervised from the sympathy and for hate of a thousand of persons that he hasn’t considered. There isn’t Letes fro him!”; the Letes is the river of forgetfulness, and it is the speculative way that decsribes the habit of high society but also of down society; he certainly describes the society the he can see, the American society, that was equal to every high societies. But Emerson was contemporary of Jean Jacques Rousseau(1712-1778), that evidently has influenced Emerson, and it is shows from this step: “(human gender)if it again take tha primary indipendence, in the its neutrality! The man that so have lost the ancient calm, and he continues to behave without finctions, without prejudges, without the fair, incorruptible…”; it is the theory of good wild od Rousseau, the has seen to the wild the human genuinity. But after Rousseau also Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) manifests his presence in this essay, the following step is the retake of think of german philosopher: “These are the voices that we hear in the solitude, but they become very weak when we enter to the word. Everywhere the society plots agaionst the virility of everybody. The society is as company of assicuration, whose members agree amongs them so that they have food, but through the cession of owner liberty. The virtus that it requests id conformity…”; it is Nietzsche, certainly that has taught and worked in Germany but the influence has come to Emerson, also because they were almost contemporary; and continuing: “(the society) doesn’t loves the realities and the creators, but alone the usances and the customs.”, and other step: “Who want be a man, he don’t be conformist. Who want conquer the immortal palm he not enables from the name of good, but search where the good is”; it is the Nietzsche, that with superman has thought to a man that is superior to convention, but Nietzsche has took example from Europen society, during his time; same reaction that Emerson has had but in American society.

Alessandro Lusana

 

 

   

 

  

 

     

     

 

 

 The name of author

John was a writer of theatre that have to write a script for a comedy, he has written also tragedies and he has had also success, but now he lacks of ideas or inspiration; he was in his home and he was searching something that was fit for a comedy, it was the usual creative crisis, he was seated on the table, and suddenly he got up and decided of go out, he dressed his jacket and gone out; he entered to a theatre , where were the personages of his comedies and tragedies, he seated on the chair and heard the dialogues of his personages, until one spoken  to him and he presented to John as Jordan.

Jordan: Do you  remember of me?

John: Certainly you are Alfred

Jordan: No! I am Jordan of tragedy Modern Hamlet

John: But in that tragedy isn’t somebody that has name Jordan

Jordan: In fact I am in other comedy

John: The Modern Hamlet was a tragedy, not a comedy. It is may  that the author of this script that somebody has reading now may remember this comedy, but certainly I no.

Jordan: Hamlet, What the name of author of this script?

Hamlet: Alexander, I think, but I am not sure about it, you should  aske it to  Bartholomew , he remember everything, also the clues of this comedy

Jordan(cloud): Bartholomew, where is he?

Bartholomew (from a side of scene): There I am here what is so important? That you call me through this way? If you want rob me you can’t because I haven’t money, but if you want…

Jordan(looking him) Silence , because you are the pain on the neck

Bartholomew: You must say to him, this is John, because he is the author of my comedy or tragedy, I don’t remember, John where am I?

John: In the tragedy Modern Hamlet and in the First Catilinaria

Bartholomew: Yes now I remember there  I was Cicero, and when I begun “Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patient nostra. I has been very realistic.

Jordan: What the name of this script?

Bartholomew: I don’t remember! You can ask to Elisabeth.

Jordan: Elisabeth do you remember the name of author…?

Elisabeth: (blocking him) Albert or Alfred or…Andrew.

Jordan(open a door and askes to the author): What is your name?

Author: I don’t know, you must decide it, thank you. 

Alessandro Lusana  

 Γνωθι σαυτόν trough others

The Socratic words this is the know yourself, is a motto that Socrates(b.Ch.469-399) has took from the temple of Apollo in Delphi, and he has been the first in history of philosophy, that used this advise for a knowledge of owner wit, because  you can educate yourself and know yourself that the first person that you must know, this is yourself because the first and closer person is youself that not know but the importance of Socrates is, above all, in the way that he has used this is the confront, that he has made directly to his “pupils” trough the questions that he given to everybody, because the sake was it, the knowledge of themselves, for this the questions were alone so logic, because the contradiction was the solicitation to auto knowledge, why it is important? Simple because the confront to others is fundamental to know  other and above all herself, because has Socrates the questions are necessary to know owner limit and to get over it for  to grow, it is the growth, but trough the confront is the experience for to know ourselves, why?  Because  our limit we not know, but trough the experience, h3ence the practical and external exercise, is the motive for to know until we can make something that seems difficult; we can try of overcome this difficult and solve the problems, thence we can know ourselves trough the difficult and the method that we are using that can be difficult, and in those occasions that we can know ourselves, because we can know the our reactions in front of difficult, hence we study our soul and our limits but, as Socrates, we must consider the single case that has thought to us something around our wit, and above all if we want overcome these difficult, that is the moment when we can know ourselves and above all the difficult that we must face and solve, in this occasion we can consider our interior strong and our will; thence in this moment we are studying ourselves, although unconsciously, in fact the reflection about the our reactions is always after, reflections about our courage, our intelligence and our capacity to face the difficult, hence also the capacity of our wit for to face the difficult; whereby the object of our study is ourselves, and these are the moments when we know ourselves, directly and practically, because the circumstance is real not alone theoretical and we can know also the reaction of our wit above all, thereupon the reactions that can be fair or courage. Hence Socrates has had right, and he has used other experience, that was dialogue, instead the true knowledge of ourselves occurs alone to direct experience.

Alessandro Lusana    

 

 Environment on the literature: Boccaccio

Giovanni Boccaccio(1313-1375), author of Decameron has took from the common people and other social classes in the Florence of 14^th century; in short the Decameron is a portrait of Florentine society in 14^th century; Boccaccio has took true personages, that after he has  tied to framework, but he has took the human typology or personages really existed ; the first that we can consider is the novella of Calandrino, who was he? He was a modest painter whose the name  Giovannozzo of Pierino that in this novella with others two painters, Bruno di Giovanni and Bonamico Cristofani, called Buffalmacco, truly existed, the first clue that shows the inspiration from the reality of Boccaccio, but he has took also the wit of Florence, both the liking and the joke that in Florence was present, but the wit  of then is in the following words: “Was then in Florence a young very charming and fro everything he was very cunning, called Maso del Saggio, that heard  about ingenuity of Calandrino, he proposed of amuse oneself trough some joke; this wit is typical of Florence and the cue during the meeting and everywhere is typical, hence Boccaccio have to invent very short for these novellas; also because some datum we can read on the Vasari, in the his book The life of painters, sculptors and architects where Vasari about Calandrino says: “Buonamico di Cristofano, called Buffalmacco, Florentine painter, that was pupil of Andrea Tafi and he was also burlesque, celebrated from mister Giovanni Boccaccio…”; it can be believed from the readers as the reality, but Vasari remembered one alone painting work, because in the life of Buffalmacco isn’t others, and he has said to beginning of life of Buffalmacco that his painting are in much town of Tuscany, but he told alone one painting cycle, that was deleted already during the 16^th century; hence this painter has been fitted on the guilt of doctors in year 1320, but other there isn’t, why? Because this painter lived certainly in Florence, but he not has been famous, but Boccaccio has took this character that about him, he has known in Florence; furthermore a Bruno of Jolin is mentioned in a contract in year 1301, and the other information hat Vasari has took as Boccaccio from the common knowledge but that are, regard to art, very untrustworthy ; anyway  the way that Boccaccio has followed was followed also from Vasari; hence the environment of Florentine city was an archive. A literary critic Mario Baratto has said about the Decameron: “…the historic nature of Decameron, regard to social condition of the Florentine people in the century 1300…”, he has described the people and his wit during the 14^th century.

Alessandro Lusana           

 

 The pagan wit in the Christian fields

A historical man, Carlo Ginzburg(1939-2026) has found much documents around a use very anomalous in a Italian region, Veneto, precisely around the city of Cividale, where in some far villages were uses very strange for the Christian religion, he has took the testimonies of some member of these company, called the Benandanti, this is the well walking, that were considered witchcrafts, and a father for the to save his son, because he thought has the possessed from the evil, he has searched Paul Gasparutto, because he has the fame that he follows these witchcraft, and he has fame of to be a Well walking; but the note  of principal oddness is that these rites, also violent, occurred during the night, beyond the usual tell about the dragon wings necessary to come to meeting. Some rite is described from a witness, regard a question given to a citizen: “Are you of those witchcraft?, And he said that he was a wellwalking, and every Thursday he came to a wood and there they danced, eat and drink, and when go back the wickedwalk they come to basin  drink and urine in the barrel and the wine is poured…and similar things that I don’t believe”; we tie it to framework that is agriculture, hence the protagonist are rural that confesses that they are wellwalking; inasmuch the heresy was very limited and short. Important difference from these meeting and the witchcraft meeting is the absence, as the Ginzburg has stressed, of evil, that isn’t neither mentioned, but the description of these meeting Ginzburg described: “The dark rite, witchcraft men and women that fight among them with sorgum plants and Wellwalking have fennel plant, and the antiquity or origin of this rite is attested from the valor of fennel, why? Simple because in ancient time the fennel was considered a holy plant, drugs and fortifying, and after the Marathon battle, in year 490 b.Ch., the Greek used this plant as symbol of victory; in the Christin context the beneficent effects of this plant could guarantee and rich harvest. Ginzburg describes the Wellwalking: “The Wellwalking said that they are contrapposto to witchcraft both men and woman, that they cured the victims of wicked actions of these, and they say also that they meet them in mysterious night meeting, but they can’t tell it because they are going to beat, they ride cats, hares and other animals”; it is alone a fantasy of a member of these Wellwalking, that evidently thought to be save because he said that he contrasts the witchcraft, but the condemn, if it has been, and I don’t think, because the inquisitors were culture men and intelligent, would be for their Pagan meaning; because the fight between Wellwalking and Wickedwolking, was the heritage that in ancient people was for defense of owner fields, hence owner harvest, and the meeting in the wood and the dance, drink and eat, was the celebration after a victory, that was consequently; thence these rites are is heritage from ancient customs, that then were vital, as the defense of land, but during the 16^th century was suspect, although alone partially, because I think that the inquisitor have laughed for these meeting.

Alessandro Lusana