* Vase

Shaffer: Poetry: Philosophy’s daddy

By Matthew Shaffer
The Yale Daily News

On Truth and Lies

Published Friday, April 16, 2010

I’ve spent a great deal of time and effort studying and debating philosophy at Yale. But these endeavors have left me only with a belief in the inadequacy of philosophy and its subordination to poetry. Four years here have been a lived confirmation of Paul de Man’s claim that “Philosophy turns out to be an endless reflection on its own destruction at the hands of literature.” My education has ended in its own critique.
Philosophy is ultimately motivated by a will to domination. It is an attempt to subdue the world with a strong grip, to stop experience and reality from wiggling away....

#1 By tim ellison '10 2:54p.m. on April 16, 2010

So, Matt, does that mean that because I wrote my senior essay on poetry, I win?

"Do not all charms fly/
At the mere touch of cold philosophy?"
Keats - Lamia

In all seriousness, there are some things philosophy can do that poetry can't. Try looking for 'reality' and in 'truth' in Wordsworth, Keats, Shakespeare or Stevens and all you get is Wordsworth's truth, Keats's truth, Shakespeare's truth, and Stevens's truth. This may be perspectivism, but can't philosophers discover aspects of reality that escape subjectivity?

(I love being able to write sentences like that!)

#2 By MC '13 3:33p.m. on April 16, 2010

As much as I hate to admit it, here is a Shaffer column I agree with entirely. Thank you for articulating perfectly a position I've been desperately trying to take for years.

#3 By KM 8:38p.m. on April 16, 2010

I love what you wrote, and that you are willing to immerse yourself in such abstract worlds, worlds which can never be understood by others, but only by the self. But here lies the flaw, the problem with what you have said. Poetry is Philosophy. There is no separation of the two. Further, Philosophy is Poetry. The article strikes two key elements of humanity; Art, and Philosophy. However, there exists a third, religion. All three of these elements hold that key trait mentioned earlier, not a single one can be expected to transfer to others, but only can be manifested in the self. All three elements are the same thing.
"Reality is chaos, inaccessible to a mind and language so far removed from it. Thought never reflects and words never express the essence of the world because minds and words are spheres too far from any reality that might lurk behind experience." -Is this not art? It is, if not to you then to I alone. Is this not philosophy? Clearly, it is, and if you deny, it does not matter to me. And, finally, this is religion. All three elements are the same, never can they be separated. Only when we lose sight and confuse these, drawing lines in between each element which cannot be crossed, do we run into the issues you raised. But, these lines, the barriers, the distinction you assumed existed as you wrote this essay, do not exist.
A true artist will tell you that there is art in every facet of life. A philosopher, that philosophy is everywhere. A follower of a religion, that their belief system is in everything. A true artist will tell you that there is philosophy everywhere. A follower of a religion, that art can be seen everywhere. And so on.
Two true artist can look at the same work, and see something different. Two philosophers can think of the same issue, and abstract it in different ways, find different meaning. Two followers of the same religion will never believe the same thing. And so on.
All three elements are inseparable, unquantifiable, and nontransferable. All three elements are the same thing, they are all inherently a human thing.
A true human will say that there is that human touch in every aspect of life.
The illusion of difference is adolescence. The realization of unity; that is where wisdom lies.

#4 By hmmmm 11:47p.m. on April 16, 2010

muddle-headed nonsense...

#5 By literature grad student 3:53p.m. on April 18, 2010

I defy Mr. Shaffer to spend more than three months in a literature graduate program and not come to the conclusion that literary studies comprises a collection of narcissistic observations and semantic quibbling in dire, dire need of a philosophical kick in the butt.


#6 By PK 12:42a.m. on April 19, 2010

Literature is a flower. Philosophy is its genetic code. Which would you rather have in a vase?
PK