For there is a certain class of them who would willingly be called philosophers, whose books in our language are said to be numerous, and which I do not despise; for, indeed, I never read them: but still, because the authors themselves declare that they write without any regularity, or method, or elegance, or ornament, I do not care to read what must be so void of entertainment.
There is no one in the least acquainted with literature who does not know the style and sentiments of that school; wherefore, since they are at no pains to express themselves well, I do not see why they should be read by anybody except by one another.
Let them read them, if they please, who are of the same opinions; for in the same manner as all men read Plato and the other Socratics, with those who sprung from them, even those who do not agree with their opinions, or are very indifferent about them; but scarcely any one except their own disciples take Epicurus or Metrodorus into their hands; so they alone read these Latin books who think that the arguments contained in them are sound.
But, in my opinion, whatever is published should be recommended to the reading of every man of learning; and though we may not succeed in this ourselves, yet nevertheless we must be sensible that this ought to be the aim of every writer.
And on this account I have always been pleased with the custom of the Peripatetics and Academics, of disputing on both sides of the question; not solely from its being the only method of discovering what is probable on every subject, but also because it affords the greatest scope for practicing eloquence; a method that Aristotle first made use of, and afterward all the Aristotelians; and in our own memory Philo, whom we have often heard, appointed one time to treat of the precepts of the rhetoricians, and another for philosophical discussion, to which custom I was brought to conform by my friends at my Tusculum; and accordingly our leisure time was spent in this manner.
And therefore, as yesterday before noon we applied ourselves to speaking, and in the afternoon went down into the Academy, the discussions which were held there I have acquainted you with, not in the manner of a narration, but in almost the very same words which were employed in the debate.
—from Cicero, Tusculan Disputations 2.3
A few years ago, I had a professor who advised me only to teach those texts which I happened to agree with. I found it odd that a man so esteemed in the world of the liberal arts would say such a thing, so I asked him to explain.
“You can’t teach what you don’t understand, and you can’t understand what you don’t already believe.”
I see the wisdom in the first statement of his argument, but I must respectfully part ways with him regarding the second. Isn’t it a bit problematic to say that something is true because I believe it, rather than believing it because it is true? Don’t put the cart in front of the horse. The truth will not be revealed without getting a thorough lay of the land.
A mind is hardly healthy if it does not freely engage with points of view that might be either uncomfortable or unfamiliar, and if there is no openness to a wide range of possibilities, then learning itself becomes impossible.
An act of belief without a broad awareness of the options is like a shot in the dark. Assent should follow from a critical understanding, not precede it. Is it any wonder that intellectuals are said to be snooty, when they are so often unwilling to consider any alternatives to their preferred conclusions?
It isn’t the widely read man who is the snob, but rather the man who only stares at his own navel. I immediately think of spoiled children who assume that closing their eyes and covering their ears will make the world disappear.
Cicero speaks of those who read only what their friends write, and I see much the same happening around me all the time, not just in the realm of education, but also in politics, religion, or business, where convenience, gratification, and popularity usually matter far more than a reverence for the truth.
It feels safe to be part of a tribe, and so we sadly blind ourselves to anything outside the comfort zone, finding satisfaction in hating “them” since they aren’t exactly like “us”.
Let them have their reward, and let them be a part of their special clubs, but for those of us who still wish to take in a wider view, let us follow a different path.
Now whenever I say something along these lines, my betters will nod their heads in approval, reminding me how they too value a diversity of opinions. Don’t be fooled, because so many of them are actually quite narrow in their judgments, sticking only to the fashions of the hour, then changing their tunes as soon as a new trend comes around.
They are being led by the nose, not thinking for themselves, and it would therefore be foolish to expect any insights from them about the true and the false or the right and the wrong.
I recall how my great-grandfather told me not to trust a man who changed his clothes or his hairstyle according to the latest craze, as that meant he was just as likely to compromise his convictions. I deeply miss that fine fellow.
It would be better to find more people out there like the ancient Peripatetics and Academics, who vigorously encouraged debate on conflicting opinions. Notice that I say debate, and not conflict, as they are not the same thing at all. Such people are out there, though you will not necessarily find them in those places where the small-minded tend to congregate.
I must say that, however frustrating it may have been, I have never failed to discover something of value in any book I have read. Even if it is full of errors, coming to grasp the nature of those errors has been beneficial, and it just goes to show how things are only as good for us as we decide to make them.
No comments:
Post a Comment