Pages

Monday, September 6, 2010

Humanism: Pride is the Root of All Evil

Petrarch, considered the original Humanist, believed that language and philosophy could be analyzed by a single individual who could divine the meaning of it. Not only did he believe in the study of the classic philosophers and theory, but he held that humans were capable of directing their own learning. (Does that sound like any of our classes? Hmmm) Petrarch thought that none of his peers were equal to him in reading and writing, so he wrote letters to Cicero, Homer, and St. Augustine discussing his thoughts on their writings and theories. In my earlier post, Who Am I To Judge?, I wrestled with the idea that I can't criticize other authors and philosophers. Petrarch disagrees-in fact he believed that we have a duty to analyze and dissect previous literature. For it is only from that exercise will we prove old ideas in error and discover our own theories. Thank you Petrarch- you would've made a great motivational speaker.

Mirandola, further explains that man is indeed a supreme creation because of our agency; we can choose to learn and grow or regress since it isn't mandated for us. Now before you let all this go to your head, do you really think that everything you have is due to your own labors? Do you really believe you are completely independent? Hardly my friends. Part of being human involves relationships and how they add meaning to our actions. Petrarch himself wrote many books and essays, but he also wrote 366 poems for the woman he fell in love with. We do crazy things for people we love because we recognize that love makes us something more than we can be alone.

Forgive me for bringing Harry Potter into this, but J.K. Rowling, though atheist, suggests in the series that love is actually the supreme force at work. It is love that saves Harry as an infant and it is love that ultimately allows Harry to defeat Voldemort because Voldemort cannot see the value of it. Voldemort is the quintessential example of pride- trying one thing after another to further the interests of himself in an effort to gain immortality. Had he gained it, I believe he would've found it very lonely after awhile. In fact, most people we would label "powerful" are only powerful through the support of their followers. Yet, there is another kind of power found in those who understand truth. There is power in knowing who you are and what that means. There is a power is service just as there is in education that all the armies of the world could not lay at our feet.

We live in a world of YOUtube and online search engines that let us celebrate our individual abilities, and honestly I am grateful for what they add to our culture and learning. But looking back at the humanist movement, I feel like I can claim they errored in their rationale. Man in himself is not the measure of all things. Man (and woman) in the way he (she) loves is the measure of all things.
***
A quote from my manuscript: "Nicolas Sparks wrote, "The first time you fall in love, it changes your life forever, and no matter how hard you try, the feelin' never goes away."Because that first love is when you really let someone else into your heart and soul and realize that the meaning of life is wrapped up in a feeling so great it defies accurate description. It's ...the first time you give a part of yourself away, and you can never be the same again."

5 comments:

  1. You've actually tapped into some key issues here. Perhaps the Internet promotes a kind of individualism that isn't quite the wholesome Renaissance-person type that we idealize from history. This is something that Andrew Keen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Keen) makes a point of in his damning article/book (The Cult of the Amateur) about why the Internet is messing everything up.

    You talk about love, and with all of the self-oriented efforts within the Renaissance, perhaps there is the threat of egotism there. I wrote a sonnet about this recently as I was reflecting on these problems: http://opensourcesonnets.blogspot.com/2010/09/measure-of-all-things.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. I like your thoughts about unravelling logical points made. There are philosophers that claim there exists no connection between individuals, but I would disagree, like you, on that. I perceive that our understanding of information is reactionary. Modern art is reactionary to contemporary art. Copernicus reacted to Ptolemy, etc. The progressor was doubt, and pre-established idea. Men establish social placement, and by doing so codify a social tone. Like a group job interview, some social tones are cut-throat competitive, but confused by compassion. I agree love is the greatest trait, and a social tone exemplified in this would be nearing character perfection. Unravelling logical points demands crital analytical skills, of which can reestablish existing tones, and secure a society.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree that Humanism has some problems, but I did apreciate Mirandola's disscussion on agency. When thinking about Humanism, I think it's good to focus on the positive. At least the Humanists were right about the importance of learning, even if they got a lot of other things wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I definitely agree that love is one of the most supreme, and divine feelings and blessings that we have. I also believe it is what motivates God to do what He does. He loves us, and wants the best for us. We are DEFINITELY connected to each other, and one of the strongest, and most Christlike bonds, is the bond of love.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'd just appreciate it if you would please not name "he who must not be named." Thanks.

    the nerve of some people....

    ReplyDelete