|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
Politeness is to human nature what warmth is to wax. -Arthur Schopenhauer,
philosopher (1788-1860)
As much as I like the daily word and the word placed in a context I look out for the daily quote or statement.
Most of the time I smile in regognition or pleasant surprise.
The above one I somehow feel is a little , well what could I call it?
Right; obviously warmth will melt the wax but then the wax is either burned into nothing or turned into a shapeless puddle (muddle?)
So what a strange comparison. If you take it through litterally it would mean human nature would disappear just like the wax.
That's what according to Shopenhauer politeness does to human nature.
It makes it melt, disappear.
Is this meant as a positive qualification of politeness or just the opposite? I really think this is an unstable sort of a statememt.
Don't know exactly how to define it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
boy, howdy! this is some of that philosophical type stuff, ya know..
SECTION 36. Politeness,—which the Chinese hold to be a cardinal virtue,—is based upon two considerations of policy. I have explained one of these considerations in my Ethics; the other is as follows:—Politeness is a tacit agreement that people’s miserable defects, whether moral or intellectual, shall on either side be ignored and not made the subject of reproach; and since these defects are thus rendered somewhat less obtrusive, the result is mutually advantageous.44
44 Translator’s Note.—In the passage referred to (Grundlage der Moral, collected works, Vol. IV., pp. 187 and 198), Schopenhauer explains politeness as a conventional and systematic attempt to mask the egoism of human nature in the small affairs of life,—an egoism so repulsive that some such device is necessary for the purpose of concealing its ugliness. The relation which politeness bears to the true love of one’s neighbor is analogous to that existing between justice as an affair of legality, and justice as the real integrity of the heart.]
It is a wise thing to be polite; consequently, it is a stupid thing to be rude. To make enemies by unnecessary and willful incivility, is just as insane a proceeding as to set your house on fire. For politeness is like a counter—an avowedly false coin, with which it is foolish to be stingy. A sensible man will be generous in the use of it. It is customary in every country to end a letter with the words:—your most obedient servant—votre très-humble serviteur—suo devotissimo servo. (The Germans are the only people who suppress the word servant—Diener—because, of course, it is not true!) However, to carry politeness to such an extent as to damage your prospects, is like giving money where only counters are expected.
Wax, a substance naturally hard and brittle, can be made soft by the application of a little warmth, so that it will take any shape you please. In the same way, by being polite and friendly, you can make people pliable and obliging, even though they are apt to be crabbed and malevolent. Hence politeness is to human nature what warmth is to wax.
Of course, it is no easy matter to be polite; in so far, I mean, as it requires us to show great respect for everybody, whereas most people deserve none at all; and again in so far as it demands that we should feign the most lively interest in people, when we must be very glad that we have nothing to do with them. To combine politeness with pride is a masterpiece of wisdom.
We should be much less ready to lose our temper over an insult,—which, in the strict sense of the word, means that we have not been treated with respect,—if, on the one hand, we have not such an exaggerated estimate of our value and dignity—that is to say, if we were not so immensely proud of ourselves; and, on the other hand, if we had arrived at any clear notion of the judgment which, in his heart, one man generally passes upon another. If most people resent the slightest hint that any blame attaches to them, you may imagine their feelings if they were to overhear what their acquaintance say about them. You should never lose sight of the fact that ordinary politeness is only a grinning mask: if it shifts its place a little, or is removed for a moment, there is no use raising a hue and cry. When a man is downright rude, it is as though he had taken off all his clothes, and stood before you in puris naturalibus. Like most men in this condition, he does not present a very attractive appearance.
- Arthur Schopenhauer, Counsels and Maxims
edit: I wonder if Anu considered the context...
"Schopenhauer is in many ways peculiar among philosophers. He is a pessimist, whereas almost all the others are in some sense optimists." - Bertrand Russell
Last edited by tsuwm; 11/20/06 08:23 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
Quote:
Wax, a substance naturally hard and brittle, can be made soft by the application of a little warmth, so that it will take any shape you please. In the same way, by being polite and friendly, you can make people pliable and obliging, even though they are apt to be crabbed and malevolent. Hence politeness is to human nature what warmth is to wax.
Well tsuwm's posting of Schopenhauer's unabridged remarks about politeness and wax should answer BranShea's question, but I would like to further explain the narrowness of Schopenhauer's point of view, as such:
Schopenhauer failed to understand that "politeness" is an invention of social evolution designed to keep close-quartered cultures functioning under overcrowded conditions that cause strife.
Today we all know that all homogenous societies respond to the "crabbed and malevolent" effects of overcrowding by excessive overblown politeness (especially island cultures like the Brits and the Nips but not New Yorkers).
Last edited by themilum; 11/21/06 02:46 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
Quote:
Wax, a substance naturally hard and brittle, can be made soft by the application of a little warmth, so that it will take any shape you please. In the same way, by being polite and friendly, you can make people pliable and obliging, even though they are apt to be crabbed and malevolent. Hence politeness is to human nature what warmth is to wax.
Of course, it is no easy matter to be polite; in so far, I mean, as it requires us to show great respect for everybody, whereas most people deserve none at all; and again in so far as it demands that we should feign the most lively interest in people, when we must be very glad that we have nothing to do with them. To combine politeness with pride is a masterpiece of wisdom.
All of your edited text is very nice indeed and I'll add it to my paper AWAD collection, but I light out these two parts because in this context it becomes clear to me that Schopenhauer is referring to moulding wax while my first thought went out to candle wax.(the season,maybe)
The second part is just so well put! Great, I won't say I'm going to read all of Schopenhauer now, but every word makes clear that he is/was a great philosopher.
So thank you kindly and politely.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
Quote:
Well I would like to further explain the narrowness of Schopenhauer's point of view, as such:
Schopenhauer failed to understand that "politeness" is an invention of social evolution designed to keep close-quartered cultures functioning under overcrowded conditions that cause strife.
Today we all know that all homogenous societies respond to the "crabbed and malevolent" effects of overcrowding by excessive overblown politeness (especially island cultures like the Brits and the Nips but not New Yorkers).
Besides my guess that excessive overblown is a redundancy I think that Schopenhauer makes it very clear that he understands politeness quite for what it is : a cultivated construction to make social traffic easier. And where you see it as linked to island cultures I think the more or less strict use of polite formulas is sooner linked to social classes and training.(not class restricted)
Further more some people are more apt to be polite (though I would rather call it gracious, because in politeness there is also often the desire to really please, meaning not all politeness is calculated strategy) than others.
And finally, anyone can be tempted by someone challenging him over the edge to drop politeness and say the word he'd rather not said.
Schopenhauer's line: " To combine politeness with pride is a masterpiece of wisdom " could refer to this.
Loosing your temper often brings along as side effect the loss of some self esteem.
It is true that politeness seems to slip easier in overcrowded situations , but also the training to be polite seems to be slipping away little by little. Non excessive politeness is a good thing.
(IMO)
Last edited by BranShea; 11/23/06 03:55 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467 |
Schopenhauers: something that is extended after Thanksgiving.
TEd
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,055
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,055 |
> "Schopenhauer is in many ways peculiar among philosophers. He is a pessimist, whereas almost all the others are in some sense optimists." - Bertrand Russell
Schopenhauer derided Leibnitz for his 'systematic optimism' and criticised his prof Hegel on similar points. The realisation of the futility of 'Zweckoptimismus' (optimism to suit one's own needs) is an insight that moulded some of the best philosophers that followed Schopenhauer, not least his greatest student Nietzsche in his early years. The militant assertion of 'pessimism' was no doubt somewhat akin to Voltaire's ironic 'best of all possible worlds' too and must be seen in the context of the chronology of intellectual debate. The polarity between optimism and pessimism is clearly trickier than a cursory glance might suggest anyway. To start with, optimism is often seen as an imperative for moral reasons; this basic interest in the 'lie' of a life affirming stance is one that touches us all. And thus the assertion of pessimism also hides more than it reveals. One thing is for sure though, Schopenhauer sees comedy were Hegel and Nietzsche do not, even if it is comedy involving Mephistopheles and the selling of the soul.
At to the assertion that almost all other philosophers are optimists - see all Eastern works. These could, by Russell's measure, easily be written off as negative and pessimistic, for suffering is positioned front and centre. One must differentiate in order to tease apart the confusion in such arguments, these terms are otherwise used only in the most perfunctory way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
Quote:
Besides my guess that "excessive overblown" is a redundancy I think that Schopenhauer makes it very clear that he understands politeness quite for what it is : a cultivated construction to make social traffic easier. And where you see it as linked to island cultures I think the more or less strict use of polite formulas is sooner linked to social classes and training.(not class restricted)
Wrongo, BranShea, my use of "excessive overblown" was intended as a intensifier. But yes, I should have set "overblown" apart with commas.
And no! Schopenhauser could not have possibly understand "politeness" for what it is, because Schopenhauser didn't understand the nature of language.
Like BelligerentMan said about the comments of that phoney, third rate, English philosopher, Bertrand Russell, who accused Shopenhauser of being "optimistic" :
(in effect) before you can philosophically assign a value to human behavior you must first determine a raison d'etre for humans.
Last edited by themilum; 11/23/06 01:25 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
as long as you're throwing about "wrongo"s, them, here's a couple:
>Bertrand Russell, who accused Shopenhauser of being "optimistic"
rather the opposite is the case.
and it's not really sporting to accuse Shopenhauser[sic] of "narrowness of view" in regards to "overcrowding" and "social evolution" - he lived from 1788 to 1860, and, perforce, his views are dated accordingly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 293
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 293 |
THAT made me groan aloud!
Thanks.
"I am certain there is too much certainty in the world" -Michael Crichton
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
Quote:
...it's not really sporting to accuse Shopenhauser[sic] of "narrowness of view" in regards to "overcrowding" and "social evolution" - he lived from 1788 to 1860, and, perforce, his views are dated accordingly.
Really, now tsuwm, are you concerned with the feelings of Shopenhauser [sic] long dead? Or are you, rather, concerned about the objective reality of our present existence?
Well? We who care await your answer.  
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,154
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,154 |
"and it's not really sporting to accuse Shopenhauser[sic] of "narrowness of view" in regards to "overcrowding" and "social evolution" - he lived from 1788 to 1860, and, perforce, his views are dated accordingly"
I agree. It would be interesting to see what the pundits of 2206 will have to say about our philosophies and pronouncements.
IMHO politeness and manners, ie what society decides are acceptable behaviours and styles of speech, have existed in many non-island and undercrowded societies. They do become much more important when a society is under stress such as crowding.
My take on "combining politeness and pride" especially given the era in which it was written is that politeness e.g. kneeling and an outward show of inferiority before a ruler could be difficult to combine with the knowledge that they are in fact inferior in ability, intelligence or even monetary worth.
Although it would get easier when you remember that they could have your head cut off.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
Quote:
I agree. It would be interesting to see what the pundits of 2206 will have to say about our philosophies and pronouncements.
I dunno, Zed, it might be dull reading if it turns out that we of the 21st century have only rehashed the stale thinking of Schopenhauer [sic]and the usual round up of long dead philosophical suspects.
As for now I think I'd rather know the thinking of the thinking members of this board than discuss what Nietzsche and the boys thought.
Don't you think?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
" Would a virtuoso feel flattered by the applause of his audience if he knew that except for one or two the rest of the lot was deaf ?"
A man who writes such lines is not yet 'a long dead' person.
I picked up my old ' History of Philosophy' book to get a bit more truth of it.
Schopenhauer 1788-1860, son of a distinguished, whealthy merchant of Danzig. Moving to Hamburg, then Le Havre. They travelled a lot. After his fathers death round 1818 his mother and he settled in Weimar where he gave up the merchant education to change for an academic career.He already had a thorough knowledge of French and especially of English literature due to a stay of six month in England for his father's business sake.
In Weimar , his mother , who became a known novelist, opened her residence to many famous men. Ghoethe, Wieland, the brothers Schlegel and many more. He soon enterded universty to specialize in classic languages, but also studied the exact sciences.
Two years in Gottingen and two in Berlin, mocking his philosophy professors. Specially Fichte. (' there is some system in his madness' )
In 1813, age 25, he got his ' Ph.D.' on what was to be his departing point for all his future philosophical writing.(someting mathematical)
The centerpoint in his philosophy is the brake with his positivist predecessors, Plato , Kant and his contemporaries, Hegel , Fichte etc.
No spirit, reason, idea, the harmony of the universe, but will as the blind driving force of mankind as well as all organic and anorganic phenomenons.
All is au fond reasonless , irratinional in the deeper layers of creation. No best of all posslble worlds. Pessimism, but with a ironic, cynic yet humourus eye for the Human Comedy.
Ways out this vally of tears are through: 1. esthetics 2. Ethics.
(1) Art , specially music gives consolation, redempition.( 2.) Foresaking of the will as deliverance, coming close to
mystisism and abstenance like in Christian religions, but even more approaching ancient Indian Philosophies of which at that time first not yet very perfect translations had been done by a French writer. ( he is somehow inconsequent by accepting reincarnation and thus the survival of the 'will spirit'.)I guess he sees the eternal always recycling life energy.
Best read Counsils and Maxims and judge again. Could be less boring than you assume. Yes , I prefer to know what other people on this board are thinking too as long as they do. First requisite is to have something to think about, I think.
Last edited by BranShea; 11/24/06 09:27 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
Yeah BranShea, Schopenhauer 1788-1860, said some neat stuff for his day. The trouble with the veneration of that which has gone before is that it's seeming profundity intimidates the young who then tend to quote rather than think.
For example today we who do think understand that words of philosophy must fit into a framework based on hard science.
For example, remember Socrates who said to the effect...
The essence of a thing is the thing's function and this function will direct the thinking enquirer towards the purpose of the thing.
So: The occasion of ritualistic polite behavior in human beings serves as a cultural cohesive which helps the breeding group in its collective desire to continue through time.
In essence politeness is this and nothing more.
Last edited by themilum; 11/25/06 02:53 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
Quote:
Yeah BranShea,
For example today we who do think understand that words of philosophy must fit into a framework based on hard science.
For example, remember Socrates who said to the effect........ ( A quote from the past? );~)
The essence of a thing is the thing's function and this function will direct the thinking enquirer towards the purpose of the thing.
So: The occasion of ritualistic polite behavior in human beings serves as a cultural cohesive which helps the breeding group in its collective desire to continue through time.
Thanks for this reasonable answer.
Of course, that is a way to look at it and no doubt you're right.
But I do hope a bit of frameless thinking is still allowed. Why would we have freedom of speech
and no freedom of thinking?
For about 30 years we have tried so hard to not intimidate the young and the drop- out rate still keeps rising.
Does educating mean pleasing the young?
I was teaching highschool (art/art history) when the so-called "mammoth law" changed our system from
max. 400 students pro school to giant schools: 2000 to 4000 students. 1968. Merging schools. Heavy layers of managemant now
burden the system, changing the rules or no rules all the time and quality of education is going down fast.
Counters-sounds are heard. Not just by the old, but also by the younger.Propositions to return first of all
to grammar lessons. (yesterday, Le Monde, large article)
To propose this cool scientific appraoch on one hand and to take away the tools (grammar) to good 'exact'
understanding on the other hand is frustrating. ( I admit the limits of the word exact and the mixing of two subjects in this case)
Why not combine ' veneration' of what was, with holding on to
the present. Is that so hard?
Were you refering to Wittgenstein with your words about 'the nature of language'? The man who used words to strip all words of their meaning? And " raison d'etre " of humanity; I'm one of the pessimists who are convinced that that will never be found.
Exuse the long posts. I don' t like them, but need brakes laws. I long to get back to lighter stuff too.
Last edited by BranShea; 11/25/06 04:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
Quote:
Were you refering to Wittgenstein with your words about 'the nature of language'? The man who used words to strip all words of their meaning? And " raison d'etre " of humanity; I'm one of the pessimists who are convinced that that will never be found.
Very good, BranShea, you touched upon the two most salient points.
Wittgenstein was right when he kinda said that words have no meaning.
Words don't have meaning; words have function. Words can't explain how "something" came from "nothing", but words can direct the user towards an understanding of the likelihood of positive or negative events occurring that affect the continuation of the breeding group.
For example the "word-idea" that effected the increase in the number of students in the schools in your country was likely unrelated to the subsequent growth of the administrative bureaucracy. Like lawyers and politicians a bureaucracy has no conceptual design to grow fat and cumbersome and inept. They are simply people with like minded aims who unknowingly act in concert against the common good and then rationlize the poor results.
All human Cultures are, by their very nature, prone to a similar fate.
WORDS HAVE NO ABSOLUTE MEANING; WORDS ONLY HAVE A FUNCTION WITHIN A SET.
Last edited by themilum; 11/26/06 12:00 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
It depends on what "meaning" means. Words carry meaning but the meaning is the meaning we put on them. That meaning can, and does, change. You'll occasionally find someone who interprets this to mean that one person can change the meaning of a word and, while it's true that one person can initiate such a change, it takes a village to change a word's meaning.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
Yes, that's the point. What is the definition of meaning?
Meaning : Noun
1. The message that is intended or expressed.
2. The idea that is intended; "What is the meaning of this proverb?".
Meaning lies within the words and although it cannot tell us how
'something came from nothing' and never will for we cannot even imagine what 'nothing' really means, words and their meaning are
tools we use through agreement on what each word represents and their meaning can develop and change or loose value.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
Tswum and Themilum (who's little provocation took this a longer way)
and others who contributed to this exhausting thread, thanks! I'm going to read old uncle Arthur's "Counsils and Maxims "now. His words will function within the set of his scriptures.
Nu use to google or dictionare "nothing". There's a whole world of nothing for sale, but no final definiton.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,361
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
647
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
