[Air-L] history of Plato's Phaedrus as example of moral / media panic?
Thomas Ball
xtc283 at gmail.com
Sun Apr 28 09:45:52 PDT 2019
That exhibition is a statement of current knowledge. But does it change the
recognition of the reification of ancient history, particularly among
British classicists, prior to the mid-point of the last century?
Please, no more 'gotcha' posts...
Best regards,
Thomas
On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 12:13 PM Simon Joyce <simonjoyce at blueyonder.co.uk>
wrote:
> Re. “strong tradition among many historians of western civilization,
> particularly the English, to truncate world history before the Greeks as
> being irrelevant” — this exhibition currently on at British Library in
> London...
> https://londonist.com/london/art-and-photography/writing-at-british-library
>
>
>
> On 28 Apr 2019, at 15:35, Thomas Ball <xtc283 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Charles-
> Thanks for your followup question. My view is that there exists a strong
> tradition among many historians of western civilization, particularly the
> English, to truncate world history before the Greeks as being irrelevant.
> Thus, in delineating the 'classic' period it is commonly posited as
> beginning around 700 BCE with the pre-Socratics. In part, this is driven by
> an academic's need to limit the boundaries of their research and
> discussion. What complicates things is the extent to which we take
> philosophy or history or science as transhistorical categories, and how
> much we see those as ways of knowing constituted by discrete textual
> traditions/reception traditions where there is a constant, relentless
> return to Greek texts as the fountainhead.
> FWIW,
> Best regards,
> Thomas
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 10:04 AM Charles M. Ess <c.m.ess at media.uio.no>
> wrote:
>
> Again, many thanks on all fronts.
>
>
> Can you provide an example of historians who place the origins of
>
> writing to 700 BCE in Greece? This would likewise greatly puzzle me - I
>
> thought it was common knowledge that the Epic of Gilgamesh is likely
>
> from 2700 BCE, generally regarded as in-scribing oral traditions that go
>
> back earlier; hieroglyphics are likewise well before 700 BCE, etc.
>
>
> I'd have to go back to check - but my recollection is that these
>
> historical episodes / examples of writing are properly included in the
>
> theorists / historians familiar to me. But again, my great worry is
>
> that I've missed something (many things) more familiar and taken for
>
> granted among colleagues with more formal academic training in media and
>
> communication studies.
>
>
> If I ever turn any of this into a presentable paper, I'll let you and
>
> all the other contributors to this thread know - and certainly
>
> gratefully acknowledge all the insights and help.
>
>
> Again, many thanks and all best.
>
> - charles
>
>
> On 26/04/2019 16:32, Thomas Ball wrote:
>
> Charles-
>
> Based on the empirical information from Google Ngrams, it would
>
> appear that modern notions of moral and media panic were initiated by
>
> McLuhan in his 1964 book, /Understanding Media./ It's around or shortly
>
> after that date that these keywords explode into exponential or even
>
> superexponential growth. While Havelock's book was first published in
>
> 1963, it's doubtful that it could have had such widespread dissemination
>
> as to catalyze the observed growth rate in these keywords. Moreover,
>
> Ong's book and theory was a much later contribution to an already extant
>
> literature.
>
> Regardless, it's useful to suggest that Plato's ambivalence about
>
> writing in the /Phaedrus/ was a similarly late contribution. Those
>
> historians who place the origins of writing to around 700 BC in Greece
>
> are entirely missing the fact that there was an earlier, more than 3,000
>
> year old cuneiform civilization in Sumeria. This places into question
>
> any theories linking temporal shifts in orality, chirometry, cognition,
>
> memory, brain function, etc., to pre-Socratic Greece. In other words,
>
> why wouldn't there be a similar shift occurring millennia before the
>
> Greeks? See Marc Van De Mieroop's book, /Philosophy Before the Greeks:
>
> The Pursuit of Truth in Ancient Babylonia/, for confirmation of these
>
> facts.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Thomas
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 7:24 AM Ricardo Rohm <ricardorohm at gmail.com
>
> <mailto:ricardorohm at gmail.com <ricardorohm at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
>
> Dear Charles and Air-lists,
>
>
> Congrats for this insightful discussion! Really.
>
> This made me also think about one of the questions which concerns,
>
> ultimately, "who opened the box first".
>
> I do not know if this one might be the case, but in my life I have
>
> sometimes faced some so-called scientific discourses which seemed to
>
> be
>
> entitled with logical meaning, a valid argument or even deductively
>
> achieved by a plettora of "practical examples or personal
>
> experiences".
>
> Whatever.
>
> I have also come accross conclusions from reflexions, surveys and
>
> essays,
>
> which have been used strategically for important purposes, decision
>
> makings
>
> by governments and corporatios. Many of which have lead humanity to
>
> misery,
>
> war, suffering, and oppression: yes oppression!
>
>
> Citing and refering to famous classical authors in the past ( and
>
> still
>
> nowadays) is an interesting habit which goes far beyond than a
>
> simpler
>
> meaning of well- established methodological procedures or even
>
> research
>
> designs. Beyond also a rhetoric concern or vanity. Indeed, and I
>
> repeat, -
>
> I do not know if the present case in the Air-l here discussed might
>
> be
>
> considered in my refkexion! - I cannot avoid but keep wondering:
>
>
> To whom would it be useful and empowering to cast away important
>
> critics on
>
> new technologies, as well as, who "should" be spared of the
>
> so-called "weak
>
> and worthless critics", once someone or some organization (and if
>
> science,.in general is considered, an Institution) decides that these
>
> critics might be nothing but some kind of moral or psychological
>
> disorder
>
> or malfunction ?
>
>
> On the other hand - (and I might share mine with many 😉 ) - what
>
> might
>
> motivate the curiosity towards "opening this box of Plato/Socrates"
>
> in the
>
> present moment?
>
> Yes, because this is the time when privacy ans other "boxes and
>
> caves seem
>
> to be vanishing" , intentionally produced disinformation is
>
> compromising
>
> democracy in many countries, and.so on and forth.
>
>
> In fact, I decided to share my own concerns here with you because,
>
> maybe,
>
> someone becomes intetested in producing some research or personal
>
> discussions at some future phisical venue, strengthening memory and
>
> bonds,
>
> instead of "writing or computing".
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Ricardo Rohm
>
> Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
>
> (at) FAU - Erlangen- Nürnberg
>
>
>
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2019, 18:37 Charles M. Ess, <c.m.ess at media.uio.no
>
> <mailto:c.m.ess at media.uio.no <c.m.ess at media.uio.no>>> wrote:
>
>
> Dear AoIRists,
>
>
> Please be kind and patient with me, recalling that my formal
>
> academic
>
> training was in history of philosophy, German literature, and
>
> ancient
>
> Greek. I am comparatively still a little wet around the ears with
>
> regard to media and communication studies - or so it seems in this
>
> instance.
>
>
> I keep encountering discussions of moral / media panics that
>
> consistently invoke Plato's _myth_ of the invention of writing.
>
>
> This seemingly standard invocation puzzles me greatly for a long
>
> list of
>
> reasons. I include a short list below for anyone with time and
>
> interest
>
> in looking them over.
>
>
> The upshot is that I'm left wondering: who - and when -
>
> introduced what
>
> has apparently become received tradition in these domains that the
>
> mythos (see "2" below) of the invention of writing in the
>
> Phaedrus is a
>
> prime or supportive example moral or media panic?
>
>
> This is, as they say in administration-speak, an appreciative
>
> inquiry.
>
> I'm genuinely curious for the sake of better understanding how
>
> this
>
> trope first appeared, etc - as well as genuine worried that I may
>
> have
>
> somehow missed something that is considered elementary and
>
> obvious for
>
> those of you with academic training more directly within media and
>
> communication studies.
>
>
> Many thanks in advance for any enlightenment and eludation!
>
> best,
>
> - charles ess
>
>
> PS: The short list includes:
>
> 1) the account is taken (bloody and screaming) out of the context
>
> of the
>
> larger dialogue in the Phaedrus. When read within the larger
>
> context -
>
> beginning with (the young) Phaedrus' effort to impress (perhaps
>
> seduce)
>
> Socrates by memorizing a speech he has copied down on a scroll and
>
> initially tries to hide from Socrates - the mythos works much more
>
> immediately as a lightly veiled (and hence, pedagogically
>
> speaking,
>
> likely more successful) chastisement of Phaedrus' efforts at
>
> dissimulation. By no means a wholesale critique of writing per
>
> se.
>
> 2) The account is explicitly delivered as a _mythos_ - too easily
>
> translated as a "myth." But: a _mythos_ in Plato is a technical /
>
> philosophical form, going well beyond and in some ways directly
>
> contradicting more everyday notions of "myth" as a false story; a
>
> mythos
>
> is specifically an _oral_ story, with its own set of distinctive
>
> strengths and limitations. It is often used in Plato when
>
> interlocutors,
>
> attempting to pursue a reasoned argument (logos), come to an
>
> impass.
>
> The relation between mythos and logos is hence often
>
> complementary, not
>
> contradictory.
>
> 3) It would seem very odd for an author of multiple dialogues, of
>
> sometimes staggering sophistication and literary nuance, to
>
> sincerely
>
> believe that writing is somehow an entirely suspect technology.
>
> Different from orality, certainly, as is suggested by the
>
> consistent
>
> presentation of Socrates as an oral teacher, the careful use of
>
> mythos
>
> vs. logos, etc. - but hardly an example of media / moral panic.
>
> And so on.
>
> Again: what am I missing?
>
>
> Again, many thanks,
>
> - c.
>
> --
>
> Professor in Media Studies
>
> Department of Media and Communication
>
> University of Oslo
>
> <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html>
>
>
> Postboks 1093
>
> Blindern 0317
>
> Oslo, Norway
>
> c.m.ess at media.uio.no <mailto:c.m.ess at media.uio.no <c.m.ess at media.uio.no>>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org <mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org
> <Air-L at listserv.aoir.org>>
>
> mailing list
>
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers
>
> http://aoir.org
>
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
>
> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
>
>
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
>
> http://www.aoir.org/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org <mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org
> <Air-L at listserv.aoir.org>> mailing
>
> list
>
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers
>
> http://aoir.org
>
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
>
> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
>
>
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
>
> http://www.aoir.org/
>
>
>
> --
>
> Professor in Media Studies
>
> Department of Media and Communication
>
> University of Oslo
>
> <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html>
>
>
> Postboks 1093
>
> Blindern 0317
>
> Oslo, Norway
>
> c.m.ess at media.uio.no
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
>
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> http://www.aoir.org/
>
>
More information about the Air-L
mailing list