Saturday, September 13, 2008

Motion and thought ...

... Traveler, yes, traveler.(Hat tip, Dave Lull.)

I am afraid Ebert seems a bit like a fool... Indeed, he seems, to me, a rather predictable example of the American so unsure of his judgments as to need a trip to Europe to justify his standing in the world. His views on politics are very familiar. They are of a piece with the dilettante Americans who traipse abroad, calling it an education and letting it all go at that.


Socrates, told of someone who had traveled the world but learned nothing said that was because "he took himself with him." Then there was Thoreau, who said he had traveled a good deal - "in Lexington and Concord."

Now, just to spare some people an unnecessary effort: I link to this because it discusses a specious argument. Forget that the argument was made in reference to a political candidate you may not support. A specious argument is a specious argument, however useful one may find it. Of course, to use a specious argument, knowing it is specious, just because it is useful, is to forfeit one's intellectual integrity.

10 comments:

  1. Egawds, gimme a brick so I can toss it through Ebert's rose-coloured glasses (or, au courantly, "flasses").

    Specious argument, logical fallacy, the sky's no limit when it comes to self-smuggified arrogance, is it? Not according to what I've just read; and, not to put too fine a pointy head-on-a-stick on it, there's a difference between being a "tourist" and a "traveler." (Or, mebbe "fancy" and "imagination" ain't part of the id-jit's lexiconflummoxin'.)

    Interestingly, McLuhan predicted tourism would explode by the end of the twentieth century; and, of course, he was right. IMO, it doesn't matter how many country stamps you have in your passport; rather, it's far more important you have a good pair of eyes (both inwardly and outwardly oriented) to see for looking. (We only see the past; that's the difference between "see" and "perceive," I guess.)

    I also hazard the guess I'm hopelessly provincial, by Ebert's standards, though; the furthest this redneck greenhorn's ventured in all these reclusive years is The Big Choke (and, that was only because of the incentive of picking up an award for 24 grand; otherwise, is there a dentist in the house?).

    Your concluding sentence is a Notable Quotable in my books, Frank; I like it very much; and, it's got that unforgettable Wilsonian sheen on't. Thanks to both you and Dave (and, BTW, the candidate I'm not supporting is NOT running in your country; though, I sure as hell wish he would, with Nikes on his two wrong right feets).

    ReplyDelete
  2. p.s. I'm almost half-way through the Katie download; and no, I will not pay for high-speed when it's outta my cyber-snack bracket in the Canadian Internet Rake-'Em-In Racket
    p.p.s. Katie, I can hardly wait to hear your voice!
    p.p.p.s. Thanks to you, FW, I'm now listening to The Glory Of Palestrina; so, it's sooth-calmingness and goes very well with watermelon

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous3:18 AM

    I agree that The Grand Tour of Europe is no longer an essential component of a cultural education. Shuffling through the Sistine Chapel in a packed herd of sweaty, neck-craning tourists is far less fruitful for me than exploring Michelangelo's masterpiece through reproductions in books or on-line.

    But Sarah Palin is not applying for a job as some kind of freelance, Thoreauvian intellectual. She is applying for a job that may require her to make decisions affecting the lives of millions of ordinary people worldwide. Some actual, experiential familiarity with those lives should be a pre-requisite for the job.

    My own career as an agricultural geneticist has taken me to the rural areas of dozens of countries, where I've spent hundreds of hours talking with farmers about their hopes, fears, and needs. Neither my formal education nor extensive reading nor discussions with experts provided me with the insights gained during these informal conversations. Those insights, in turn, inform my opinions about the effiacy of foreign aid, the dangers of global warming, future sources of global conflict, etc. I simply do not believe that Palin, or any other political candidate, could formulate meaningful policy positions without similar experiences.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Um . . . erm . . . ah, Jeff? You're a good reader; and, I know that because I've seen your incisive and intelligent comments on this blog; but, before Frank wakes up, between you and me, with all due respect, I think you might wish to reconsider what you've chosen to communicate here, particularly since the focus is on rhetorical issues, not political ones. As a wise guy once said, "Forget that the argument was made in reference to a political candidate you may not support." And, as a partner in this blog, I kinda second that sentiment. No offense intended; and, I do think you'll understand what I'm communicating here. This is a blog about books and art, more or less; so, we kinda avoid the judgmentalising that goes along with political agendae.

    Just my deux. Take it or love it :).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous10:03 AM

    Judith, my comment was not meant to be partisan. Indeed, I was explicit that the argument applies to any applicant for a job whose scope affects the lives of real people.

    At a more profound level, I take issue with the hermetic idea that the world can be understood solely through intense experience of oneself, or through one's social, intellectual and spiritual confreres. We must get to know those whose experiences take us outside the boundaries of our own lives if we are to truly understand the world.

    Literature and the other arts, at their very best, offer only a smoky porthole view of this wider world. In this sense, I disagree with Socrates, Thoreau, and Frank. This broader point was the reason I felt my comment was appropriate for an arts blog.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I honestly don't buy the idea that travel abroad necessarily improves - what, the mind? one's outlook? I know some pretty well-traveled people who are also pretty narrow-minded. As for Palin, since her name has been brought up, she is the only governor whose state borders on two foreign countries, with which she has apparently done some negotiation regarding fishing rights and a natural gas pipeline of some size and significance. None of the other candiidates, to the best of my knowledge, has actually negotiated anything with any foreign power. And that sounds more pertinent than visiting some foreign land as a VIP meeting other VIPs. Tony Blair had only visited Tuscany prior to become Prime Minister. As for me and Socrates, I think our point is what I said above - that travel does not necessarily have a salutary effect on the person traveling. It depends on the person. The criticism of Palin on this score seems to me the kind parochialism we often see in the over-schooled.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous5:31 PM

    I bow to the will of the blog administrators, and will neither read nor commment again.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am sure that all we have here, Jeff, is an unfortunate slip of the keyboard. Let us all resume our civility.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Jeff, please forgive my carelessness; I am deeply sorry. I ought to have explained the source of my last sentence in the comment and explained myself more clearly by adding my damn-those-who-decry-emoticonehead smiley.

    I hope you'll reconsider; we need all the good conscious, conscientious, and conscience-driven scientists we can welcome here with open arms; (and, bears? Well, done that; been theres :).)

    ReplyDelete