Arg!

My ire is really up. My mother just e-mailed me and told me about some criticisms relayed to her concerning my education. Evidently studying Aristotle just isn't modern enough to be compatible with today's day and age.

If philosophical truth is incompatible with today's age I hardly think the truth is the thing we ought to blame, dag gum it. -?-

Evidently the same person said that the modern philosophical advances initiated by people like Hegel have allowed for advances in theology not possible with Aristotle and St. Thomas.

Who is this guy? If he were in front of me and not ordained I tell you what, man.

*WHAM*
I'd sock him in the kisser.

*Pant* *Pant* I am so MAD, gosh dern it. I've a mind to write a thesis on this, beginning now.

So, anyway, I'll write on other, more mundane things later (after I calm myself down).

Em :)

For the general benefit of man:

"Beneficient" isn't a word, evidently. The word is "Beneficent", meaning "doing or producing good". I don't know exactly where I got the idea that the former spelling and pronunciation was the proper one . . . maybe I abstracted it from "Beneficiary" or "Convenient" . . . or perhaps it's a familial mistake, or even a midwestern inaccuracy - - - but in any case, my tutor corrected me upon this very point this past week, in the middle of class and in a rather embarrassing fashion, so I thought I'd pass on the wisdom with a bit more love. Harumph.

So, other than that my week has gone rather well. Found some funny cartoons (which reminded me of home):

and my personal favorite:

Other activities of the week have stretched from trying not to watch as Obsession #2 tries to buy necessaries for a celebration of my 21st birthaday in several months (we don't get off campus often, and never separately, so I had to intuit that I should . . . you know, go take a stroll down the cereal isle . . . ) to trying to determine whether the peace decreed by Austustus Caesar could be legitimately imputed as the cause of Rome's decline (which my seminar author seems to assert very strongly . . . I'm not convinced).

Curricular quote of the week (I'm going to have to embroider it on a wall hanging for our kitchen, darling!):

" . . . a morally good man . . . must also include his friend's existence in his consciousness, and that may be accomplished by living together with him and by sharing each other's words and thoughts. For this would seem to be the meaning of living together when said of human beings: it does not mean feeding in the same place as it does in the case of cattle." -Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics; Book 9, Chapter 8

and the tutor quote of the week features, once again, Mrs. Molly Gustin:

"When I was young, I loathed going to concerts. I just hated sitting in an audience with all those people looking so very deeply 'moved'. . . . You could just smell a frog."

Have a wonderful weekend, everyone. I'm going to be reading seminar . . . all the time . . . *sigh*

Pax Christi,

Emily

The Sunset over the Mountains

From Campus

My section and seminar

Have had a great quote week:

1. Dr. Phil: "Forgive me if, in my zeal for the truth, I forget to care about other people." (this one HAS to go into his Senior page next year)

2. Mrs. G to Carps: "If I beat you enough, you'll stop getting nervous."

3. Mr. Miller, to Mr. C: "Wait, now, you're going to hold that even if your opinion is contrary to every other one on earth . . . ?"

4. Mr. "Greatest Highest" (as Mr. Applebey dubbed him): " . . . No! . . . oh, wait . . . that made sense a second ago, . . . like, you know, before I said it. Wait, now, lemme think . . . uh, . . no, man, . . I got nothin'."

and last week:

5. Patty: "How do you know that it's the fire burning you? For all you know, it could be invisible little gnomes biting your fingers.

6. Mr. "Greatest Highest":"Could you say that again and make it, like, relevant?" (*ouch!*)

On the news front, Obsession #2 and I are having our official betrothal ceremony tomorrow; which is a solomn promise according to the Old Missal. It's sorta frightening, in a way. You have to obtain an indult to break off the engagement after that. It was always a more common practice in Europe than here but we thought it was an appropriate thing to do, since we're going to be engaged for a year and a half and all.

I have no problem whatsoever with doing it; I mean, I'd marry him now if it were in any way practical. I have absolutely no misgivings about him as a person (I've known and loved him for so long) or my future role as his wife. *But, it's still a little scary!* My mother says it's like jumping off a highdive. Of course, you make sure there's water in the pool, and ascertain from other signs that it is deep enough and all, but when it comes down to the action, you do just have to go ahead and . . well . . jump.

Much love to you all. My mother is visiting so my studytime has been relatively short and restricted; I'd best take off now.

Have a great weekend!
Em

Today

In class, I experienced another instance of my pet-peeve argument. It's when some individual claims, after having a great deal of trouble with an argument or premise in the text, that the author is using his terms in a perfunctory fashion, according to what are ("obviously") ulterior motives. This argument can be phrased like this, "Well, he just wants to make his terms mean that so he can prove the point, right?" or "Well, it's all just a bunch of words that he's using to illustrate it - - they don't have to mean anything."

This is the biggest bunch of intellectual folly and laziness. It just makes me mad.

For one thing, it's doing a huge disservice to your author. If you can't find either a logical fallacy in the argument or a problem with first premises you have absolutely no reason to conclude that it's the author's sophistical intentions, rather than your lack of understanding, which is to blame.

This argument was used against St. Thomas today. That made it that much worse. Yes, I got fiesty.

This is the reason I'm having such a hard time with my seminar reading right now, too. The empiricists more or less argue like this: "Well, sure, fine, that follows - if you believe words mean anything." At which you stare at your book in disbelief. He's just objected to the use of language; not word choice, but the use of language itself. What's more, he just used language to do it. AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHhhhhhhh! How do you deal with people that daft?

Well, anyway . . .

The Deans gave us a party with guac and beer today, because they'd heard that the Juniors were suffering from low morale and discouragement. Which, well, yeah . . . we are . . .

. . . so, yeah . . the beer helped the Juniors over age 21. As for the rest of us, well . . .

the morale just kept sinking. . . .

(j.k.! ;)

Really, though, Dr. M, the Dean, sat and spoke with a bunch of us about our seminar troubles. He needed another beer afterwards . . . .

. . Poor Dr. M. Now his morale is low, too.

So I suppose I should stop this cheery message just about now. :) Have a great week, everyone!

Much Love to you all,
Emily