The problem with those who naively appeal to “the obvious” is that nothing is, in itself, obvious.
What the naif takes to be obvious may, upon reflection, turn out to be true — but his defect lies not in missing the truth, but hitting only by accident.
What the naif takes to be obvious may, upon reflection, turn out to be true — but his defect lies not in missing the truth, but hitting only by accident.
I have always liked this saying of Master Qingyuan Xingsi.
It always puts me in mind of Socrates, who often argued the views of the common people, against the “sophisticated” sophists — in an utterly uncommon way.
It always puts me in mind of Socrates, who often argued the views of the common people, against the “sophisticated” sophists — in an utterly uncommon way.
It is difficult to have a discussion with the sophisticated. Their sophistication gets in the way.
But it is impossible — often — to have a discussion with the completely uneducated man. Especially when they take a perverse pride in their own lack of education.
But it is impossible — often — to have a discussion with the completely uneducated man. Especially when they take a perverse pride in their own lack of education.
The uneducated man sees the sophistication that results from education, and concludes that education must be a bad thing — if it creates sophists.
But that is only a transitional stage.
Who, after all, would value education if it meant — becoming like the typical academic?
But that is only a transitional stage.
Who, after all, would value education if it meant — becoming like the typical academic?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
