True North

Happy Canada Day to all my Canadian readers.

O Canada! Terre de nos aïeux,
Ton front est ceint de fleurons glorieux!
Car ton bras sait porter l'épée,
Il sait porter la croix!
Ton histoire est une épopée
Des plus brillants exploits.
Et ta valeur, de foi trempée,
Protégera nos foyers et nos droits.
Protégera nos foyers et nos droits.

Sous l'oeil de Dieu, près du fleuve géant,
Le Canadien grandit en espérant,
Il est né d'une race fière,
Béni fut son berceau;
Le ciel a marqué sa carrière
Dans ce monde nouveau.
Toujours guidé par Sa lumière,
Il gardera l'honneur de son drapeau,
Il gardera l'honneur de son drapeau.

De son patron, précurseur du vrai Dieu,
Il porte au front l'auréole de feu;
Ennemi de la tyrannie,
Mais plein de loyauté,
Il veut garder dans l'harmonie
Sa fière liberté.
Et par l'effort de son génie,
Sur notre Sol asseoir la vérité,
Sur notre Sol asseoir la vérité!

Amour sacré du trône et de l'autel
Remplis nos coeurs de ton souffle immortel.
Parmi les races étrangères
Notre guide est la foi;
Sachons être un peuple de frères,
Sous le joug de la loi;
Et répétons comme nos pères
Le cri vainqueur: «Pour le Christ et le Roi»
Le cri vainqueur: «Pour le Christ et le Roi».

From my blogroll, Rebecca Stark celebrates Canada's beauty and Scott Gilbreath mourns its going astray.

Noted

I am in the midst of giving oral exams for my ethics course, so substantial posting will have to wait a bit; but expect a post on the philosophical justification of Judaism in IV Maccabees, which keeps whirling in my head and will have to be let out at some point in the near future. Some things about town:

* I intended to mention this before, but kept forgetting: David Corfield discusses the sublime in mathematics at "A Dialogue on Infinity".

* Roger Scruton, Cities for Living, discusses Léon Krier's vision for urban humanity.

* Franklin Freeman discusses Flann O'Brien. At-Swim-Two-Birds had its moments, but The Third Policeman is a stunningly good book. I would say it's better than anything Joyce wrote, but I suppose that that would be one more point on which I'd find myself in a minority.

* Dale Tuggy's series on dealing with apparent inconsistencies is up to eight posts:
Part 1: The Four R's
Part 2: Redirection
Part 3: Restraint
Part 4: Restraint and Implicit Faith
Part 5: Aquinas on Implicit Faith
Part 6: Restraint, Implicit Belief, and Stalin
Part 7: Resolution by Rational Reinterpretation
Part 8: Rational Reinterpretation, Cont.
Part 9: Rational Reinterpretation, Cont. [Added Later]
Here and there I make a nuisance of myself since, already seeing as I do even most ordinary philosophical arguments not merely in terms of premises and form but also in terms of tactic and strategy, I am very much more optimistic than Dale is about the pedigree and the rationality, at least under certain circumstances, of some of these tactics.

* Terry Tomkow discusses the need for open access philosophy. He also suggests an Open Access Pledge. I wouldn't sign it, because I don't generally sign pledges (having a tendency to forget that I signed them), but the guidelines are ones to which I am very sympathetic, and I think everyone should look them over as a way to start thinking about how the mode of their academic philosophical work could be improved.

Mrs. Norris

The division of gratifying sensations ought not, in strict justice, to have been equal; for Sir Thomas was fully resolved to be the real and consistent patron of the selected child, and Mrs. Norris had not the least intention of being at any expense whatever in her maintenance. As far as walking, talking, and contriving reached, she was thoroughly benevolent, and nobody knew better how to dictate liberality to others; but her love of money was equal to her love of directing, and she knew quite as well how to save her own as to spend that of her friends. Having married on a narrower income than she had been used to look forward to, she had, from the first, fancied a very strict line of economy necessary; and what was begun as a matter of prudence, soon grew into a matter of choice, as an object of that needful solicitude, which there were no children to supply. Had there been a family to provide for, Mrs. Norris might never have saved her money; but having no care of that kind, there was nothing to impede her frugality, or lessen the comfort of making a yearly addition to an income which they had never lived up to. Under this infatuating principle, counteracted by no real affection for her sister, it was impossible for her to aim at more than the credit of projecting and arranging so expensive a charity; though perhaps she might so little know herself, as to walk home to the Parsonage after this conversation, in the happy belief of being the most liberal-minded sister and aunt in the world.

Jane Austen, Mansfield Park

Cassandras and Cranks

Another quotable quote from the blogosphere, this time from Jack Perry:

What's the difference between a Cassandra and a crank? People write stories about Cassandra; cranks write stories about themselves.

There are actually a few quotables in that post; I liked this one as well:

Every culture, while being self-aware and cherishing the genuinely good aspects of its heritage, must forge a future for itself that applies its particular genius both to the challenges of the present and the foreseeable challenges of the future.

Feast of Saints Peter and Paul

Peter then was true; or rather was Christ true in Peter? Now when the Lord Jesus Christ would, He abandoned Peter, and Peter was found a man; but when it so pleased the Lord Jesus Christ, He filled Peter, and Peter was found true. The Rock (Petra) made Peter true, for the Rock was Christ. And what did He announce to him, when he answered a third time that he loved Christ, and a third time the Lord commended His little sheep to Peter? He announced to him beforehand his suffering. When you were young, says He, you girded yourself, and wentest whither you would, but when you shall be old, you shall stretch forth your hands, and another shall gird you, and carry you whither you would not. The Evangelist has explained to us Christ's meaning. This spoke He, says he, signifying by what death he should glorify God; that is that he was crucified for Christ; for this is, You shall stretch forth your hands. Where now is that denier? Then after this the Lord Christ said, Follow Me. Not in the same sense as before, when he called the disciples. For then too He said, Follow Me; but then to instruction, now to a crown. Was he not afraid to be put to death when he denied Christ? He was afraid to suffer that which Christ suffered. But now he must be afraid no more. For he saw Him now Alive in the Flesh, whom he had seen hanging on the Tree. By His Resurrection Christ took away the fear of death; and forasmuch as He had taken away the fear of death, with good reason did He enquire of Peter's love. Fear had thrice denied, love thrice confessed. The threefoldness of denial, the forsaking of the Truth; the threefoldness of confession, the testimony of love.

Augustine, Sermon 97 on the New Testament

Two Poem Drafts

Twilight

Out the corner of my eye
I see that Sleep is passing by.
Dreams and yawns are in the air;
they swoop and swing and hover there.
The light of sun has aged to sighs
of thoughts that dwell on hours by,
and moonlight wanders, fresh and fair,
farther than the sunlight dared.

Your Words

Like fingernails across my heart
where ache like blood flows out
in a misery of doubt
and frenzied strokes of art,
a madness and a shout
that echoes in the ear
like the shrieks and screams of fear
of an army turned to rout,
I am cut by steel-edged swords,
darts of darkness, and your words.

Metaphysical Lunacy

A famous passage from Thomas Reid:


An inquiry into the human mind, on the principles of common sense By Thomas Reid

I have on occasion seen this represented as a 'madness' argument against skepticism, i.e., the argument that it would be simply mad to be a skeptic. But this is not, I think, accurate. The passage is not primarily an argument against skepticism at all; it is a diagnosis of it, namely, as a form of madness, and, without explicitly stating a cure, obviously suggests one -- namely, interaction with society. But a diagnosis of a particular instance of a philosophical error is only an argument against it for those who share the account underlying the diagnosis; and a general diagnosis of a kind of philosophical error is not really an argument against it at all, but a classification of it assuming that it is, indeed, an error or, at least, a malady (since the two need not coincide perfectly).

However, it is closely related to a common argument against skepticism, namely, the apraxia objection, the argument that skepticism would make practical life impossible. This bothered Hume enough to consider the matter; and we find the answer in Treatise 1.4, especially (but not exclusively) in 1.4.7. Reid's diagnosis is interesting in that it is a diagnosis of skepticism derived from Hume, the person who, for Reid, is almost a paradigm example of a skeptic. In making this diagnosis, Reid is simply building on Hume's own diagnosis of the situation, since Hume makes the same diagnosis, calling it a "philosophical melancholy and delirium" and also regards it as intermittent, dissipating on exposure to society. Thus it is important to note that you can be a skeptic and agree with Reid's diagnosis; Hume is the prime example, since, in fact, Reid's diagnosis is simply taken from Hume.