Pynchon & Math (Aristotle vs. Plato)

[Bled Welder]

Fair enough.

Mali,  land of the Dogon.  It is true that I know knowthing of Los Lobos.
 Besides a film.  With all due respect, it is true, I am in no way
competent to compare the two, The Wolves, with who I call, Floyd..  In
awywhichways.

My feeling is that, the comparison, would have to have a great deal of
qualifying, but I will speak about The Wolves with the color of the sky.

Your point is well taken.

I will, in fact, hopefully, tonight, listen to The Wolves.   And I mean
that in no way, with sarcasm.

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:06 PM, <malignd at aol.com> wrote:

> I don't listen to music, certainly not to rock and roll, for knowledge
> ("Los Lobos knows better?") and I never compared the two bands.  But yes:
>  Los Lobos is a far better band than Pink Floyd if your interest is in who
> can play better; i.e., the music  The rest is personal preference.  If you
> like bombastic British arena rock, go for Floyd.
>
>  pynI will add, as an afterthought, that LL's lyrics have (for the most
> part) been consistently been adult and socially engaged.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bled Welder <bledwelder at gmail.com>
> To: alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com>
> Cc: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 7:50 am
> Subject: Re: Pynchon & Math (Aristotle vs. Plato)
>
>  The kid is balls all, antis-fascisct, then the totalitasriun suckwads
> move move....into his brain.  Then he becomes a total drug addiict.
>
>  Then, Malignngngngt, suggests that Los Lobos knows better....?
>
>  Do they?  Maybe FloYd, hasn't been in a car ... ?
>
> Do you get that?
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 6:38 AM, Bled Welder <bledwelder at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A second-half band...
>>
>>  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR5ApYxkU-U
>>
>>  Now who was the min, thereind?  .....
>>
>>
>>  On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:57 AM, alice wellintown <
>> alicewellintown at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Several critical studies examine Pynchon and the American Pragmatists.
>>>
>>> I think a good place to turn is to Aristotle. Here in an Introduction
>>> we see a basic difference in Aristotle from Plato and Socrates, and
>>> specifically, on Ethics. The wisdom of Aristotle is that he accepts
>>> the idea that it is wise to examine or explore a topic only so far as
>>> the topic permits, that there is an exhaustion point, and that in
>>> Ethics, and in Politics, the topic does not allow for examination as
>>> it does in other sciences.
>>>
>>> Is the application of math to Ethics and Politics Fascist? Maybe.
>>> Maybe something in that GR....
>>>
>>> Is Plato a Fascist?
>>>
>>> No, but the math....
>>>
>>> The main difference between Plato and Aristotle is this: Plato thought
>>> ethics was an exact (theoretical) science; Aristotle thought precision
>>> was extremely difficult in a science such as ethics. Please note that
>>> "science" is being used in its ancient sense of knowledge in general.
>>>
>>> THE PROPER METHOD FOR ETHICS (Bk. I, Sec. 3)
>>>
>>> From ethics one can expect only as much precision as the subject
>>> matter allows. This is opposite to Plato's belief, because it does not
>>> allow for any mathematical exactness. Does this mean, then, that moral
>>> rules are "conventions," made up or created by humans? No, they are
>>> natural, but they are not like Plato's immutable forms. Aristotle
>>> avoids ethical relativism because of his confidence in human reason
>>> and experience to decide on general courses of action.
>>>
>>> Plato approached ethical questions with a formal, abstract approach,
>>> analyzing each just as he would analyze a math problem. Aristotle,
>>> though, believed that because of all the human variables found in
>>> ethics (but not found in the formal sciences), mathematical precision
>>> was impossible.
>>>
>>> http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/103/aristotle.htm
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130124/49af315c/attachment.html>