[lit-ideas] Dialogic hounding -- the virtue
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 19:45:53 -0800
"Plato says that the 'professional' military is like a 'hound' -- always
prepared to fight --, must live in a continuous 'camp', and in general,
cannot 'enjoy' the other pleasures that life is worth living for."
Well, we were a bit houndish when I was in the Marine Corps, but they did
let us go into town on liberty to enjoy the "other pleasures that life is
worth living for" - assuming we could find them and afford them with the
pittance they paid us. I understand the modern Marine Corps is much less
houndish but don't know whether that is a good or bad thing.
I have been meaning to read Plato again. There are some I want to reread
and others I haven't read - the less popular ones, but whenever I begin one,
I soon realize why it isn't popular. Gadamer read Plato late in life and I
think Heidegger did before him. I have been convinced by Gadamer and a few
others that wording, however precise, is not adequate to produce
understanding. Words and phrases are not self-authenticating. Whenever I
used that expression on another listserve, they developed an irresistible
need to hound me off of there. The arguments of modern hermeneutics seem
clear to me, but then it seemed clear to me that Marxism, Pragmatism,
Existentialism and Analytic Philosophy are negative. Apparently these
matters can't be accepted without elaboration aka dialogue - which is
evidence of Gadamer's argument for the necessity and importance of dialogue.
And what more perfect dialogues than Plato's?
Lawrence
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 7:11 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Xerxesian/Leonidesian: The Clash
Thanks to L. J. Helm for further quotes from Curtius, and update on his
readings -- the two-volume life of Hitler. I have in my bedside table a life
of Thatcher, so aren't we *being* civilised?
Anyway, tried an OED search for Xerxesian, but no hit, so there it goes.
This quote, though, under entry 'free' -- may interest:
1849 GROTE Greece II. lxix. (1862) VI. 216 To
Xerxes, the conception of *free-citizenship..was..incomprehensible.
---- And perhaps just as well, since he could *brainwash* (plusei cephalou)
his army.
---- On the other hand, Leonidas's 299 (I'm assuming he was one of the gang)
_were_ free-citizens.
The point has military relevance.
I'm currrently reading Plato's POLITEIA (Loeb v. 1), and see that there's
this footnote by the translator on the distinction between:
* amateur soldier (as it were, strategike, I think, is the Greek)
and
* professional 'mercenary'.
Plato goes on to point out that only 'courage' in the citizen is which
counts (where I would translate 'citizen' as *civilian*).
But this will surely is offensive to the military types (no derogation in
'type' -- think 'archetype'). For:
--- while I can conceive the idea of a mercenary
-- I can also conceive the idea of a 'civilian' who thinks his or her
highest duty is of the military type (I'm talking confusedly).
Plato says that the 'professional' military is like a 'hound' -- always
prepared to fight --, must live in a continuous 'camp', and in general,
cannot 'enjoy' the other pleasures that life is worth living for.
Cheers,
JL
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Dialogic hounding -- the virtue
