Quote:
Originally Posted by Penforhire
I mentioned formal education only because I thought it would be a common response. I did think your "knowledge" connotation is close to how we think of formal education.
|
Well, I'm not so sure I get what you mean by my knowledge connotation.
In my first post I was merely referring to fiction works that had more definite meaning and purpose and were meant to be edifying and instructive to a specific community, as opposed to fiction works that tend to try to be more subjective or ambiguous, or purely for the purposes of entertainment, escapism, or for anesthesia. I wasn't trying to imply that they were better or that they had more to offer, or that people should study these texts, or even that they had anything to offer to the modern reader.
I first thought about starting this thread while commenting on the Ben Franklin thread, specifically when I was thinking about how Franklin used poetry and books to develop his system of morals as well as to develop his communication and writing skills. I was also thinking about the enlightenment and copyright laws. Copyright laws were designed to facilitate the spread of knowledge. When most people argue against copyright, they do so in the argument that information wants to be free, and that the spread of knowledge should not be restricted. This then got me thinking about a quote from Ursula Le Guinn, who said that information should be free, but that works created for entertainment purposes cannot be rightly considered information.
However, I did not want this to be a copyright thread, since copyright discussions seems to be everywhere on these forums. What I wanted to do was go to the basics; before we discuss the purposes of copyright and its effect on the spread and dissemination of knowledge, we first need to answer the question, what is knowledge? In Franklin's time, when the U.S. copyright laws were created, almost all works were created either to educate, or they were forms of poetry that could be imitated and used to improve ones own writing and thinking. With very little fiction, and most works being didactic, the founding fathers found it valuable that copyright law should find the best balance to encourage the creation and dissemination of all works. Of course the general uses of fiction has changed, so I think it is important to ask the question again in modern times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penforhire
From your extended discussion I imagine you would really enjoy Robert Pirsig's books (Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and Lila: An Inquiry Into Morals). He delves strongly into related topics. I liked Zen more than Lila, maybe too much 'telling-not-showing' in Lila.
|
Thanks for the recommendation. I have heard about Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, but this is the first time I have heard of Lila. Is Zen a good read? I do not know much about Zen; it appeared to me to be one of those superficial meditations that are frequently published by lazy amateur philosophers looking to cash in, as well as one of the numerous books on "zen;" you know, the multitude of books and blogs published about zen that actually have no real understanding of zen, but use it as a catchword for what people think are eastern and alternative philosophies, or philosophies of nonmaterialism, in order to exploit people's desire to escape the rat race and find contentment.