Alfred Jarry’s imaginary science Acting intentionally dumb doesn’t always have to be seen as an ironic gesture, but instead could perhaps be seen as a strategy for understanding something from a different perspective. By asking questions in a different language or rhetoric we get different answers. Perhaps by simplifying a complex idea you might get a simplified answer. You could also do the opposite, by over complicating you can stretch the limits and put pre-existing concepts into doubt. The latter is something that French Writer Alfred Jarry does with his concept ‘pataphysics. In Jarry’s novel Exploits and Opinions of Dr. Faustroll he provides us with a couple of definitions of ‘pataphysics. 'pataphysics, preceded by an apostrophe …show more content…
This chapter will attempt to further strengthen true dumbness in favour of smart or smart dumbness by comparing the smart vs dumb scenario to Aristotle’s potentiality vs. actuality and Søren Kierkegaard’s possibility vs necessity. In his Metaphysics, Aristotle believes every action or process to be incomplete, therefore dumbness, the incomplete intellect, has the potentiality of smartness. For example actions such as walking, learning, building etc. are all incomplete actions, these incomplete actions have potentiality. Shouldn’t this example prove that all states of being, being dumb and being smart, are incomplete actions and therefore potentialities? Aristotle also makes the point that every potentiality is simultaneously the potentiality of the negation of what it is the potentiality of. Meaning that something with a potentiality for being can admit of both being and not being, because it is neither or. According to this statement in makes sense to jump to the conclusion that dumbness should have the potentiality for smartness and vice versa. This is not the case however and is so for one reason. Rationally speaking in terms of a progression dumbness will always have the potentiality to become smartness, but smartness, coming from dumbness, is a human faculty which cannot be unlearned. Once you become smart there is no turning back to dumbness. Dumbness can admit both of being and of not being dumb, something that smartness cannot do. Aristotle gives an example that a box made from wood isn’t described as being wood but as being wood-esque because it is wood that is potentially a box. This is why something that is smart can appear to be dumb but not the other way
What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'? Why was Anderson’s incompetence with language and household skills both a problem and a blessing for her work in Tarnby? Anderson’s incompetence with language and household problems were due to the translation and understanding of a new culture. Barbara’s confusion of flour with sugar caused her meat loaf to be a disaster. The two words are very similar in Denmark.
He is saying that, theoretically, the growth of reason would come with knowledge. People would be less inclined to have a lot of children because they would no longer be afraid of losing them to unnatural things. People would then be more inclined to focus on their happiness and expanding their
The Web. 11 Feb. 2014. http://www.himss.org/News/NewsDetail.aspx?ItemNumber=28122>. 2. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'?
Michael W. McConnell, “The Forgotten Constitutional Moment,” Constitutional Commentary, No. 1. 1 (Winter 1994): 121-22. 21. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'?
28. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'? Will you swear unqualified allegiance to the United States of America or obedience to the Japanese emperor. ?” (Evacuation Experiences of Minoru Yasui, 1981, pg19). This quote is from the text Evacuation Experiences of Minoru Yasui by author Minoru Yasui, who is a Japanese American.
What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'? The solutions to these problems are qualitative and not quantitative so they are not classified as true or false but as good or bad. 4. What is the difference between a.. The solution to these problems cannot be verified through time for its effects.
Law Enforcement intelligence is a development of military and national security intelligence. Over the years, this type of intelligence will go through many names but as of today it is known as Intelligence –led policing. Intelligence- led policing’s main focus is on key criminal activities. This paper will discuss community policing, problem-oriented policing, and CompStat, as they relate to intelligence-led policing.
Traditional theories of intelligence do not account for the ambiguity of classes such as philosophy or for the wide range of interests a child can have. For example, contemporary theories such as Sternberg’s Theory of Intelligence and Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences both account for more than the general intelligence accounted for in traditional intelligence theories. According to Robert Sternberg’s Successful (Triarchic) Theory of Intelligence, are Hector’s difficulties in philosophy indicative of future difficulties in the business world? According to Sternberg’s Theory of Intelligence, Hector’s difficulty in philosophy will not negatively affect his future. Sternberg would instead focus on elements of successful intelligence like Hector’s involvement and contribution as an individual, as opposed to relying on intelligence measured by tests.
Therefore, Aristotle solves the problem of becoming by distinguishing the fact that there are three principles of change. Within the generation from nonbeing, there are exists two types -- a substantial change and an accidental change. The hypokeimenon underlies these changes. When Socrates turns from pale to red, it is an accidental change, because Socrates as a man is underlying this change. But when a statue comes from unformed bronze, it is a substantial change, because the substance changes. However, the underlying thing is the bronzeness of it. Thus, becoming exists and is knowable. It is because it is.
“Philosophical analysis resolves complex propositions or concepts into simpler ones. It simplifies a proposition and makes it more understandable. Consider this example and see how it was
Socrates explains that akrasia is not possible through his reasoning of doing something that is negative is the cause of ignorance. Socrates explains that we never subconsciously do what is bad (Aristotle on Weakness of Will).Ultimately, Socrates claims if one knows good, they will pursue it and that if one does what is wrong, it is done involuntarily out of ignorance (Arrington 18). When Socrates reasons and expresses his explanation in the Protagoras and Meno, the question of weakness of will is brought up and his reaso...
of the book. Vol. 24. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'? Berkeley, CA: University of California, 1984.
...n more useful when it is simplified because it points you in the right direction so that you can fill in the details as you acquire more knowledge yourself. Its predictive power also enable us form hypothesis in the sciences that can be confirmed or disproved after experimentation. Simplification tends to explain things better and even help us to predict what ought to be. On the other hand it can be argued that these simplifications also leave out important details and may not be that useful in the long run .
Journal of Democracy, 17 (3). 6. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'? [online] Available from: http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/gratis/Ibrahim-17-3.pdf> [Accessed 28 February 2011].
Vol. 3. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'?