Thursday, March 11, 2010
God(s), Truth, and Logic
In class this week, we discussed Whatley and his ideas on universal truth. Whatley believed that Truth exists, but is only accessible to God. Men will never reach universal truth, but will find much in the hunt for it. This theory reminded me of Vico's Tree of Wisdom theory. In this his theory, Vico posited that there are several types of knowledge: direct knowledge possessed by the Gods, indirect knowledge possessed by heroes, and wisdom possessed by humans. The comparison between the two ideas is not perfect, but they do share a common foundation: the idea that there is a universal/foundational/direct knowledge held by a higher being from which humans are excluded. It is the job of humans to work towards an approximation of that knowledge. Each theorists\ states that men use education to advance closer to that knowledge knowing that they will never truly arrive. What does this mean in terms of writing? Gordon Rohman describes writing as a "groping process which is really without end" (223) The idea that a writer is groping for something implies that the something already exists. It is there, waiting for the writer to discover it. The fact that the process is "without end" implies that the writer will never completely find what he is groping for. Admittedly, I am stretching Rohman's ideas somewhat, but it is still an interesting comparison. Just like Whately and Vico, Rohman's theory implies that the writer is groping toward an ultimate truth or idea that he will never truly find. Rohman also states that the act of groping is as equally important as the idea discovered. This is similar to a claim made by Whatley, who believes that "logic does not tell one 'how to find an ambiguity, but where to hunt for it'" (181). In other words, logic is the mechanism that helps the writer "grope' for his subject. He does not find it, but learns from the act of searching.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
After reading your post on Rohman's theory of writing, I immediately thought of Coleridge who considered inspiration as a source outside of ourselves. Whether we "grope" from within or seek beyond, there is a connection writers can identify with in their quest to find "something" to write about. As was pointed out in class last week, Howard Gardner recognized several types of intelligence. For each of us there are going to be different accessible ways of becoming inspired. Sitting in rows of desks trying to figure out what to write about isn't an approach that will produce results for many students. Yet, as you point out,the simple act of trying to figure something out is an act of learning.
ReplyDeleteWhen considering academic writing, I think we can further breakdown Vico's branches of knowledge even further: scholar knowledge and student knowledge. Academic writing is generally defined as a conversation between students and scholars. Scholarly knowledge provides "expert testimony" and ethos for student writers. Yet, we rarely value the experience-based knowledge possessed by the student. Rohman's groping metaphor does imply that there is an existing knowledge that simply must be discovered. Could he be referring to experience-based knowledge stored within memory? This is exactly the kind of knowledge that is tapped while engaging in Rohman's prewriting or Macrorie's freewriting. But what role does this type of knowledge have in academic writing?
ReplyDeleteThe "conversation" between Whatley and Vico brings up the question of whether there *is* that mystical "it" to grope for. Why, for that matter, is it an unattainable knowledge? Of course the idea of seeking some higher, already in-place perfection is fairly universal, I'm reminded of Buddhist ideas of Enlightment and that once obtained it completely alters the individual and most often makes them incapable of existing in the same state as other people. But that's all getting rather metaphysical. I'm inclined to enter a Nietzschean argument, that the "groping" is humanity creating a meaning, a higher perfection, that does not exist until the human mind constructs the idea of it.
ReplyDelete