Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Saturday, March 9, 2019

Time For Beauty

(For politics, please scroll down)

One of my Facebook finds:

Roman mosaic, Garden scene, fountain wall (detail), 1st century BCE. Pompeii, Italy. Massa Lubrense. National Archaeological Museum, Naples, Italy.

97 comments:

  1. The intricate, delicate floral and avian mosaic gives us yet-another example of human creativity that PROVES "Man Does Not Live by Bread Alone."

    Thank you for that reminder, AOW.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For love lies behind (as motive) every truly creative impulse... to capture that love and hold onto it for ALL eternity. (Plato, "Symposium")

      Delete
    2. No wonder Satan was banished/exiled from "The Garden".

      Delete
    3. ... or perhaps it was only us, as Satan and the other Angels live on a slightly higher plain, less ignorant than Man.

      Delete
  2. I do have one objection however:

    PLEASE DO NOT SUCCUMB to the agenda-driven, politically-motivated PC use of "BCE."

    It has always been BC meaning Before Christ, and AD which means ANNO DOMINI ("In the Year of Our Lord.")

    PLEASE LET US KEEP IT THAT WAY.

    The atheistic Left's constant attack on the Fundamental Understanding that the blessings of Western Civilization are rooted in CHRISTIANITY must not be obscured by these intellectual brigands who zealously work to return us to the brutality and deprivation of SAVAGE PAGANISM in the name of "Progress."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BCE was the term used on the art site where I found this image. Not that I like the term BCE!

      BTW, all history curricula I've recently seen are using the term BCE. Sheesh. And teachers will no longer accept BC -- well, except maybe in Christian schools.

      I wonder what Hillsdale is doing?

      Delete
    2. Not everyone can see what lies behind the curtain as you do, Franco. Wisdom escapes those who can only see with their own eyes.

      Delete
    3. That’s a fascinating philosophical objection given the era and maker of the mosaic. Is it any less “PC” to demand that all aspects of culture and history be framed by the lens of your personal faith than what you assert above?

      Delete
    4. Christianity's roots do run a bit deeper than Christ, else there'd be no 'Old Testaments' to refer to...

      ... but then again, the Roman 'reaction' to His birth may be a more recent, but more important lesson to remember. And I suspect that it is THAT Reason which Franco insists we not forget. We can't, as they once desired, "Return to the Garden" having already been expelled.

      Delete
    5. Sure, but the Romans of 1 BCE/BC had not embraced Christianity as a State religion when this mosaic was crafted. Does seeing “BCE” lead the faithful to “forget”?

      Delete
    6. If the faithful all Believed, of course not. But then THAT isn't the point. The vast majority today don't Believe. They, like many children "ritually" (for show) believe in things largely for the sake of those who really Believe (in Jesus/Santa/Marx). For the consequences of not at least Small 'b believing, is a forgetting of the social lesson learned and the linguistic acceptance of a New Constitution/ Covenant.

      Just like the Feminists who descry the "Patriarchy". The only thing worse than the Patriarchy, would be the lack of ANY social order (aka Chaos). For as Plato once said to his name-questioning friends Cratylus & Hermogenes...

      SOCRATES: Nor can we reasonably say, Cratylus, that there is knowledge at all, if everything is in a state of transition and there is nothing abiding; for knowledge too cannot continue to be knowledge unless continuing always to abide and exist. But if the very nature of knowledge changes, at the time when the change occurs there will be no knowledge; and if the transition is always going on, there will always be no knowledge, and, according to this view, there will be no one to know and nothing to be known: but if that which knows and that which is known exists ever, and the beautiful and the good and every other thing also exist, then I do not think that they can resemble a process or flux, as we were just now supposing. Whether there is this eternal nature in things, or whether the truth is what Heracleitus and his followers and many others say, is a question hard to determine; and no man of sense will like to put himself or the education of his mind in the power of names: neither will he so far trust names or the givers of names as to be confident in any knowledge which condemns himself and other existences to an unhealthy state of unreality; he will not believe that all things leak like a pot, or imagine that the world is a man who has a running at the nose. This may be true, Cratylus, but is also very likely to be untrue; and therefore I would not have you be too easily persuaded of it. Reflect well and like a man, and do not easily accept such a doctrine; for you are young and of an age to learn. And when you have found the truth, come and tell me.

      CRATYLUS: I will do as you say, though I can assure you, Socrates, that I have been considering the matter already, and the result of a great deal of trouble and consideration is that I incline to Heracleitus.

      SOCRATES: Then, another day, my friend, when you come back, you shall give me a lesson; but at present, go into the country, as you are intending, and Hermogenes shall set you on your way.

      CRATYLUS: Very good, Socrates; I hope, however, that you will continue to think about these things yourself.

      Delete
    7. If not, let's drop the whole date convention as the French did after their "Enlightened" Revolution. Let July 4th 1776 be our 4th Thermidor...

      Delete
    8. ...but then again, OUR founders pledged under the 1st Amendement to "Establish no official religion"...

      Delete
    9. If the faithful don’t believe, then are they truly faithful? But I do agree that much of the outward display of faith is only for show and not internalized. I’m still curious though, how BCE is “politically correct” but BC isn’t.

      I actually know the answer (in my personal assessment at least), “PC” is an undefined, immeasurable construct used for convenience. I’m forever fascinated admittedly, by its employment.

      Delete
    10. CI:
      And what defines the "common era"?.
      Uhmmmm, let's see... what historically significance event happened to anchor the "common era"?
      I'm sure it will come to me.
      I'll get back to you.

      Delete
    11. Wht? Because "Custom" is an older deity than Jesus.

      Delete
    12. Historical significance of some dispute however.

      Delete
    13. If the faithful don’t believe, then are they truly faithful?

      They may not be faithful of Mind. But in genuflecting according to the established rituals, they are faithful in Deeds.

      Acta non verba!

      Delete
    14. Historical significance like "Originalism"?

      That's why "custom" is also a well recognized legal anchor...

      Delete
    15. A "Philosopher's Stone" worth touching every once in while.

      Delete
    16. Though custom does not necessarily equal sacrosanct.

      Delete
    17. Exactly. So why the need for the "linguistic purity" of BCE, whose claims to historicity are even more Tenuous than the birth and actual existence of Jesus Christ (aka BC)?

      Delete
    18. I’m currently standing alongside a St Patrick’s Day parade (my daughter is an Irish dancer), and the number of people who stood and removed their hats when the USMC color guard passed by......was pitifully small.

      Another custom fading away.

      Delete
    19. I really am not following the relevance of "custom" in:
      "Because "Custom" is an older deity than Jesus."

      Delete
    20. The ant BC as linguistically pure, to the faithful? Why the need for that, when the historiography of the existence of Christ is just as tenuous?

      Delete
    21. btw - The only way to an "enlightened" atheism lies through Christianity...

      Delete
    22. Agnostic's shouldn't bother to insist upon a change to BCE then...

      Delete
    23. Have they? I’m still wondering why one is thought “politically correct” than the other.......

      Delete
    24. Purity is an "idealists" domain. Constructing a tower in Babel is a pretty difficult thing (requiring a certain Love). Collapsing it, on the other hand, is relatively easy. Just exclude the Love....

      Delete
    25. Isn’t “purity” being demanded on both sides?

      Delete
    26. Me, I'm satisfied with the current tower, so find the change entirely "un-necessary". It only mixes up the current metaphors.

      Delete
    27. Funny, but it should be "hard" to amend the Constitution. This change got zero popular votes.

      Delete
    28. "historiography of the existence of Christ is just as tenuous?"
      Don't believe He's God, rose from the dead, a fulfillment of prophetic utterances over hundreds of years? Your choice.
      Doubt His existence?
      His life and resurrection are indisputable by many historical witnesses.
      Josephus alone.

      Delete
    29. Isn’t “purity” being demanded on both sides?

      That's why they call me a "Conservative".

      Delete
    30. Just as the choice is yours - and just as Christ’s existence IS disputed based on the evidence or lack thereof. Not only his existence, but in his supernatural persona.

      Delete
    31. Not all change is "progress".

      Delete
    32. Nope, it certainly isn’t. Just as not all customs are rational.

      Delete
    33. I’m trying to figure out what the Way El Salvadoran dancers are in St Patrick’s Day parades........

      Delete
    34. https://www.bethinking.org/jesus/ancient-evidence-for-jesus-from-non-christian-sources

      Delete
    35. So unless a change leads to a demonstrable material benefit, perhaps we should reject it. We are, after all, children of Prometheus (not Epimetheus- Afterthought). ;)

      Delete
    36. El Salvadorians wear the Green... and even have their own liberty poles/caps! ;)

      Delete
    37. ...and seem to have the good sense to not chase the "rainbows" at the top of THEIR pyramids...

      Delete
    38. Perhaps......but why? There’s no material benefit to keeping BC/AD. And there’s no material game either.

      Delete
    39. :P

      Sure there is. Consistency of at least a milleniums worth of data w/o a need for translation...

      As for their being no "material" game, I'm not a Hegelian, but I won't be so pure an idealist as to deny Materialism.

      Delete
    40. Else the French wouldn't have attempted to change THEIR calendar after 1789.

      Delete
    41. Since there is no change to the Gregorian calendar, BC and BCE are interchangeable. No translation necessary.

      Delete
    42. ...but then as Louis XVI learned, the 1st estate is not always held in very high regard.

      Delete
    43. Since there is no change to the Gregorian calendar, BC and BCE are interchangeable. No translation necessary.

      from Wiki: Due to globalization in the 20th century, the calendar has also been adopted by most non-Western countries for civil purposes. The calendar era carries the alternative secular name of "Common Era".

      Globalization is the "economic" error we (Trump/ et al) are currently seeking to cure.

      Delete
    44. Do you desire non-Weatern nations stop using the Gregorian calendar?

      Delete
    45. Perhaps we should call it the "Post-WWII" era (instead of BCE) to better distinguish it... for all post-modernisms must drive the future...

      Delete
    46. ...and I don't give a fig what non-Western citizens chose to do. After all, they're the one's that came up with the zero, Algebra, and numbers as we know them.

      Delete
    47. Perhaps they should stop relying on our atomic clocks, as well.

      Delete
    48. Barbarians...

      Jowett summary of Plato's, "Cratylus"

      Those of heroes and ordinary men are often deceptive, because they are patronymics or expressions of a wish; let us try gods and demi-gods. Gods are so called, apo tou thein, from the verb 'to run;' because the sun, moon, and stars run about the heaven; and they being the original gods of the Hellenes, as they still are of the Barbarians, their name is given to all Gods. The demons are the golden race of Hesiod, and by golden he means not literally golden, but good; and they are called demons, quasi daemones, which in old Attic was used for daimones—good men are well said to become daimones when they die, because they are knowing. Eros (with an epsilon) is the same word as eros (with an eta): 'the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair;' or perhaps they were a species of sophists or rhetoricians, and so called apo tou erotan, or eirein, from their habit of spinning questions; for eirein is equivalent to legein. I get all this from Euthyphro; and now a new and ingenious idea comes into my mind, and, if I am not careful, I shall be wiser than I ought to be by to-morrow's dawn. My idea is, that we may put in and pull out letters at pleasure and alter the accents (as, for example, Dii philos may be turned into Diphilos), and we may make words into sentences and sentences into words. The name anthrotos is a case in point, for a letter has been omitted and the accent changed; the original meaning being o anathron a opopen—he who looks up at what he sees. Psuche may be thought to be the reviving, or refreshing, or animating principle—e anapsuchousa to soma; but I am afraid that Euthyphro and his disciples will scorn this derivation, and I must find another: shall we identify the soul with the 'ordering mind' of Anaxagoras, and say that psuche, quasi phuseche = e phusin echei or ochei?—this might easily be refined into psyche. 'That is a more artistic etymology.'

      Delete
    49. Take the best, leave the rest.

      Delete
    50. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    51. Political Correctness is a tacit form of totalitarianism, an act of coercion built upon the premise that “I know better than you what you really want.”

      "It's not "Before Christ"... it's "Before the Common Era"...

      Delete
    52. Thank you for posting that definition, it describes precisely how both demands are “politically correct”.

      Delete
    53. No. One is an argument from recognized Authority. The other is a request for a change from the Authority's accepted standard to better suit an emergent, but not yet established, unrecognized authority. As such, BC is an argument from existing Authority, BCE from a politically emergent faction from within that authority.

      Authority's emergent faction has made it into a political dispute. Their argument is termed "politically correct" (not ACTUALLY correct as the previously "accepted/ standard" version was).

      Delete
    54. ...it's the "I know better than you what you really want" argument to the once universally acknowledged Authority.

      Delete
    55. It's the University Discourse's attempt to supplant the Master's Discourse. (Lacan, Four Discourses Theory)

      Delete
    56. ...although I would have to say that this originates in the more analytical (and transcendant therefore unstated) Capitalist Discourse with the University Discourse.

      Delete
    57. The Master of the Master's Discourse within a Democracy gives rise to "political correctness" as the Master Authority figure isn't a singular entity (like a King used to be).

      Delete
    58. REPRISE: "The atheistic Left's constant attack on the Fundamental Understanding that the blessings of Western Civilization are rooted in CHRISTIANITY must not be obscured by these intellectual brigands who zealously work to return us to the brutality and deprivation of SAVAGE PAGANISM in the name of "Progress."

      Thank you FJ, and Ed for your understanding and support of my contention.

      FJ quoted this from Plato above:

      "SOCRATES: Nor can we reasonably say ... that there is knowledge at all, if everything is in a state of transition and there is nothing abiding; for knowledge ... cannot continue to be knowledge unless continuing always to abide ..."

      You might just as well have stopped there, FJ, for that alone adequately underscores the point I had hoped to make.

      The Left draws much of its strength from fomenting anxiety by creating confusion by dwelling on trivial notions they love to fan into a blaze of controversy. This tends always to RETARD productivity, which fosters increased POVERTY, which iof course RETARDS true "PROGRESS"

      Thus, I would say, "PROGRESSIVISM" is in realty a form of REGRESSIVISM.

      I often compare Leftists to TERMITES, because they are forever chewing away at the FOUNDATION of our once-highly-successful model of governance.

      Instead of STRENGTHENING that foundation, then expanding and BUILDING on it, the Left works ceaselessly to DESTROY it and TOPPLE the entire structure, beause ALL that interests "THEM" is creating ever greater opportunities to seize POWER during periods of unrest and confusion that THEY foment.

      Squabbling pontlessly over SEMATICS is one of the many ways the Left achieves dominance.

      Disbelieve that at your peril.

      };^)>

      Delete
    59. Said “authority” is a non-binding personal submission.....acquiescing to such is no less politically correct than the alternative.

      Delete
    60. It’s beautifully ironic that someone who decries “squabbling over semantics”.........is squabbling over semantics.......

      Delete
    61. Thanks Franco. CI has been studiously avoiding the links I provided pointing to the historical evidence of the existence of a Jesus of Nazareth.

      Delete
    62. I am always entertained when anyone deigns to tell me what I’ve done or not done. For the record, I DID avoid your link, as I’ve seen it before. I’m not unversed in skepticism of myth and sagas.

      I don’t really doubt that a Jesus existed around that time and place. I’m not only far more skeptical on his alleged supernatural status (in a world history rife with charlatans, cults and deities you would claim aren’t real).......but I’m far less outraged (feigned or otherwise) when every aspect of history and culture isn’t presented through the lens of my personal faith.

      Delete
    63. Then don't imply that he never existed if you know better.
      You are easily entertained.

      Delete
    64. Acquiescing to political correctness is political correctness. Not doing so is it's opposite, being politically INcorrect. And neither equates to "indifference". There is a difference. They are not the same, "simply semantics," as you assert, or not.

      Delete
    65. Entertainment is a lot easier since many Republicans stopped being Conservatives and many Democrats started being Socialist.

      "Political correctness" exists or doesn't, only in the mind of the user. It has no metric and no definition. It has become the lazy retort when a fact based argument is too difficult, or the user knows they are unable to to foment one.

      It is a vapid and shallow caricature of intellectual currency.

      Delete
    66. No, "Political Correctness" is a term speaking to soviet era tactics censoring speech that did not follow the party line.
      It has a precise meaning.
      Maybe your too young to know these things.
      I saw it.

      Delete
    67. Your incorrect.......or you’ve just confirmed that the Right engages in the same.

      Your choice.

      Delete
    68. That's a great insight, CI. The Left and the Right are "political".

      @@

      Delete
    69. ...but which one of them is the definitive Authority?

      The one who persists, of course.

      Delete
    70. The insight is the hypocrisy. Blinders can help overcome that, I hear.

      Delete
    71. The Right has persisted for over a millennium. The Left, 70 years, tops. Check back in another 100.

      Delete
    72. ...for as ducky likes to say, "The struggle is eternal."

      Delete
    73. My GOD! It sure got awfully WINDY in here, didn't it?

      W_____H_____E_____W_____!

      So glad i stayed away.

      Delete
    74. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  3. I’m not much of an aficionado of art, but Roman and other classical mosaics found across Europe, have always drawn me to ponder their artistry. Thank you AOW, for posting this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I often drive out to the Worcester Art Museum which has one of the finest collections of Roman mosaics in the world.
      At times I'm drawn to the pure craftsmanship and at other times the composition.
      The "pondering" often takes a while.

      Delete
    2. Yes, Ducky. Good for yu1

      Providing DELIGHT to the senses, and ENCOURAGEMENT to the often grueling process of daily living is, I believe, the primary function of all true Art.

      Delete
  4. I assume this was pulled out of the rubble of the Vesuvius eruption.
    It's a welcome contrast to the overwhelming porn they found there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed. Which is why Franco's point reflect's the nature of this thread, "beauty." Unless you'd add Serranto's "Piss Christ" to THAT category...

      Delete
  5. To AOW from far far above:

    I was aware that "BCE" must have been used in the source you quoted, BUT had I been the one to present the beautiful mosaic, –– which truly IS the loveiiest, most graceful things of its kind Ive ever seen ––, I would never have hesitated to CORRECT the text, and would have had no compunctions whatsoever about ERADICATING "BCE" and inserting "BC" in its place.

    I categorcally REJECT the imbecillic historical revisiionsm which is being forcibly imposed on us by the Master Manipulators and Merchants of Mendacity who want us to become increasingly detached from our history, or culture, our customs, our mores, –– over very IDENTITY –– in order to turn us into SERFS –– MINDLESS MINIONS trapped in ETERNAL SERVITUDE to an International SLAVE STATE.

    A seemingly "little" thing like the insertion of ONE new letter to a term in use for well over a thousand years, ahd therefore enshrined in Custom and Tradition has TREMENDOUS implications.

    "For want of nail, a shoe was lost, etc. ..."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Franco,
      Our editing styles differ — probably because if someone quotes me, I wish that what I said would stand verbatim.

      I don’t disagree with your stance on BCE. I wish that the world had not moved in the direction it’s going.

      Delete
  6. A REPETITION IN THE HOPE OF DRAWING AN INTELLIGENT RESPONSE FROM SOMEONE'S HEART AND SOUL –– ERGO FREE FROM ""BORROWED MATERIAL" QUOTED FROM OTHER SOURCES:


    REPRISE: "The atheistic Left's constant attack on the Fundamental Understanding that the blessings of Western Civilization are rooted in CHRISTIANITY must not be obscured by these intellectual brigands who zealously work to return us to the brutality and deprivation of SAVAGE PAGANISM in the name of "Progress."

    Thank you FJ, and Ed for your understanding and support of my contention.

    FJ quoted this from Plato above:

    "SOCRATES: Nor can we reasonably say ... that there is knowledge at all, if everything is in a state of transition and there is nothing abiding; for knowledge ... cannot continue to be knowledge unless continuing always to abide ..."

    You might just as well have stopped there, FJ, for that alone adequately underscores the point I had hoped to make.

    The Left draws much of its strength from fomenting anxiety by creating confusion by dwelling on trivial notions tey love to fan into a blaze of controversy. This tends always to RETARD productivity, which fosters increased POVERTY, which iof course RETARDS true "PROGRESS"

    Thus, I would say, "PROGRESSIVISM" is in realty a form of REGRESSIVISM.

    I often compare Leftists to TERMITES, because they are forever chewing away at the FOUNDATION of our once-highly-successful model of governance.

    Instead of STRENGTHENING that foundation, then expanding and BUILDING on it, the Left works ceaselessly to DESTROY it and TOPPLE the entire structure, because ALL that interests "THEM" is creating ever-greater opportunities to seize POWER during the periods of unrest and confusion that THEY foment.

    Squabbling pontlessly over SEMANTICS is one of the many ways the Left achieves dominance.

    Disbelieve that at your peril.

    };^)>

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective

!--BLOCKING--