Against the Academicians (Dedication/First Debate)

Against the Academicians (ca. 386) is written as a debate between Licentius and Trygetius with Augustine as mediator and scribe. The debate is initially centered around truth, but as in all good dialogues other qualities become attached.

In the dedication to Romanius, Augustine invokes "that divine element in you" [1.1.3] that has been lulled to sleep by the world. Thee idea here is to awaken that element--to find out how it has been numbed and how to wake it up (indicated by the idea that Providence already dealt Romanius a "reversal" that has numbed him). So the dialogue is a kind of stimulant for Romanius.

Part of the lulling of Romanius is the worship of the things only understood by the senses. This is limiting. Nothing detected by the senses can be truly good. So, as we will see truth, the pursuit of truth, may be something that is not performed through sensual work. With the dedication Augustine has set us up with two problems: 1) the recovery of the divine within (something already always there) and 2) the senses' easy attachment to the world that keeps this divine element asleep.

To get at these matters, the debate or dialogue begins with a discussion of truth. The debate between L and T has to do with if truth needs to known, or, as it is phrased "is there any doubt that we should know the truth?" [1.2.5]. This question is quickly parsed to be connected to happiness, as in, if I did not know the truth could I be happy? (or, another way to think this question: is truth even necessary if I can be happy without it?) My easy reaction to this is that, of course, we can be happy without truth. The 'truth hurts' is a very living catch-phrase. Why even connect these? It would seem the truth causes immense pain more often than it may soothe.  In medieval mystical thought the concept of 'unknowing' is central to understanding God--the apophaticism of Pseudo-Dionysus the Areopagite, and later the author of The Cloud of Unknowing, find bliss in the act of unknowing. The darkness of unknowing is a kind of joy as one leaves behind mortal constraints on knowledge. Possibly truth is this moment of unknowing for them. But in this debate, happiness and truth are quickly linked.

The conversation shifts again, though, they attack the process of finding truth. In other words, they debate process vs. destination. Licentius (and Augustine, being an impartial mediator here) argues for process--this argument hinges on these moves: 1) happiness is finding truth; 2) the truth lines up with happiness; 3) without truth there is not happiness. Licentius' point is controversial because, for him, the search for truth implies, of course, there is no truth, yet. The person searching is happy--whether that truth is found. Just knowing it may be out there is enough. Trygetius, on the other hand, is of the mind that a person is only happy when the truth is found, not in the act.

For Trygetius, as well, perfection of a person relies on the truth. The person in process of finding the truth is not perfect since they are still looking. Licentius dismisses the idea of perfection--no one will ever be perfect, but the happy person is the one on the quest for truth. For Licentius, the important factor in being human is the seeking of truth--anyone who does not put their whole energies into it is not living up to their "perfection" or their being-human. As I'm working this through, I can feel Augustine playing me--Licentius makes so much sense--and I am anticipating Trygetius being the more correct one. But, as for now, Licentius makes more sense to me.

This first debate ends (as they retire to the baths) with the problem of error. Who is in error? Is it the one who never finds or the one searching (so as not to be in error)? Error becomes an intrinsic quality (one is always in error until one finds truth--Trygetius) or an accidental quality (it is the price one pays for going on the search--Licentius). Error is picked up in the next debate, since, until one figures out what error is, one will be unable to move toward truth.

The Rules

This first post seems appropriate as someone who inspired a monastic rule. And, in the spirit of that rule, I won't be too rigid. I'm using this blog as a running commentary, reading blog, link-node, on the works of Augustine of Hippo. I've read works by Augustine (Confessions, City of God, etc), but I wanted a place to keep a running exegesis or gloss (maybe some thoughts on the differences of those words in a later post) on his work. So, I will eschew the personal on this blog and use it for academic purposes--though the personal, of course, will, of course, come in to this. My interest in Augustine stems from my work in medieval mysticism and theology. His fingerprints are everywhere in that field--thinking about time, sexuality, faith, teaching, etc. So, I will be working with primary sources and supplementing with some secondary works (especially if readers have strong recommendations). Feel free to post questions, thoughts critiques, as I work through the oeuvre, as Michelangelo allegedly said in the end, "ancora imparo." I'm going to begin with one of Augustine's early works--something I am working with right now--Against the Academicians. I'll move into the other, more well-known, works later.