In this initial discussion of divisions, Augustine and Adeodatus argue over how to define those signs that signify things--which they call "signifiables."
The greater point that Augustine imparts is that the thing and the usage of the word is more important than the word itself. In other words the knowledge of the thing is more important than the sign connected to it.
In Augustine's words "the use of words should itself already be preferred to words; words exist so that we may use them. Furthermore, we use them in order to teach. Hence teaching is better than speaking to the same extent that the speaking is better than the words. The teaching is, therefore, that much better than words" (129). As a side note, Augustine seems to be championing an anti-materialist approach to language. I'm intrigued by this, since, much later, Bede (a fan of Augustine, thoug not above criticizing him subtly) in his On Things connects the creation of words to very material circumstances and events.
One who is a slave to the word, in this case, is led astray. The use of words is what must be focused on. This is a point Augustine is going to develop further in De Trinitate, in that he is going to critique a belief in Jesus only, the flesh of Jesus more specifically, as not real faith. Thus, Jesus-as-thing is not where faith lies. One must look beyond the material in order to experience the univocity of the Trinity, which cannot be materially contained (a point I will discuss in future blog posts about De Trinitate). Augustine wants to unhook the connection between sign and thing and to think about each separately, as well as how each may influence the other or how we may get caught up in understanding the sign only. Knowledge of the signified is preferable to the signs, though not to "knowledge of signs"--this is how Augustine leaves this section: the lesson here is to reinforce the knowledge of things and signs and not necessarily the signs-for-themselves. This dovetails with the beginning of this section in which Augustine asks Adeodatus if he is a "man"--when Adeodatus says "yes," Augustine jumps all over this and corrects him in thinking about how "man" is just a word. Thus knowing about signs would have allowed him to answer more succinctly. Augustine can be accused of trapping Adeodatus in a semantic trap, but his point will be greater in future discussions of distinctions.
Monday, July 27, 2015
Monday, July 20, 2015
The Teacher, Part 2: Beginning Discussion of the Division of Signs
This discussion ends with Augustine wondering where they are going with this discussion in the first place and wanting to assure Adeodatus that the exercise of the mind--even if it is in "play" is a sign of good.
Although this is a transhistorical comment, I could not help but think about how this discussion is a comment that resonates with our own age and the larger discussion about the purpose and decline of the humanities (and the university itself). What will become of university life as the push in higher education becomes more about careerism and training for work and less about a larger sense of the life of the mind--admittedly I am making a class-based comment for who can afford to pursue the life of the mind, as it is so called, except the affluent. But, I'm not sure that just because the practice of the life of the mind has trickled down from the privileged class that something at the heart of it should necessarily be abandoned. There is value to the the critical question, the investigative gaze, the refusal to bend to work (or capitalist) time by losing oneself in the book. To create, to make, to innovate--these are qualities of a life of the mind. I'm not sure how simple job training may allow one to do these things.
As we become more conversant only in small bites, i.e. twitter-speak or texting, the critical question becomes can we have longer and larger conversations that the life of the mind wants to ensure. I am certainly not a Luddite, I love texting, social media, etc., but I am also aware that the conversations I've had over a pot of coffee in an afternoon are much more enriching than a conversation that occurs and is often misunderstood over a text. Over the course of reading Augustine's dialogue, it is pointed to note that these conversations occur over days. They pickup where they leave off and, although Augustine is representing these dialogues to prove his own point, what he is unable to obscure is the good, the companionship, the bonding that occurs over the course of the conversation.
As Augustine phrases it, "to exercise the mind's strength and sharpness, with which we're able to not only withstand but also to love the heat of life of the region where the happy life is" (122).
As to this discussion regarding signs, the dialogue in this section boils down signification and how it comes in three forms. There are signs that cannot be signified by the signs they signify (conjunctions); there are those that do signify what they sign. They further divide this kind of signification into general and specific signification. This category distinction has to do with how the word "word" follows under the general definition of "sign" but means specifically linguistic signs and not, say, pictograms. Sign means "more" than "word" in terms of its ability to signify.
They will, of course, parse this further in the next section.
Although this is a transhistorical comment, I could not help but think about how this discussion is a comment that resonates with our own age and the larger discussion about the purpose and decline of the humanities (and the university itself). What will become of university life as the push in higher education becomes more about careerism and training for work and less about a larger sense of the life of the mind--admittedly I am making a class-based comment for who can afford to pursue the life of the mind, as it is so called, except the affluent. But, I'm not sure that just because the practice of the life of the mind has trickled down from the privileged class that something at the heart of it should necessarily be abandoned. There is value to the the critical question, the investigative gaze, the refusal to bend to work (or capitalist) time by losing oneself in the book. To create, to make, to innovate--these are qualities of a life of the mind. I'm not sure how simple job training may allow one to do these things.
As we become more conversant only in small bites, i.e. twitter-speak or texting, the critical question becomes can we have longer and larger conversations that the life of the mind wants to ensure. I am certainly not a Luddite, I love texting, social media, etc., but I am also aware that the conversations I've had over a pot of coffee in an afternoon are much more enriching than a conversation that occurs and is often misunderstood over a text. Over the course of reading Augustine's dialogue, it is pointed to note that these conversations occur over days. They pickup where they leave off and, although Augustine is representing these dialogues to prove his own point, what he is unable to obscure is the good, the companionship, the bonding that occurs over the course of the conversation.
As Augustine phrases it, "to exercise the mind's strength and sharpness, with which we're able to not only withstand but also to love the heat of life of the region where the happy life is" (122).
As to this discussion regarding signs, the dialogue in this section boils down signification and how it comes in three forms. There are signs that cannot be signified by the signs they signify (conjunctions); there are those that do signify what they sign. They further divide this kind of signification into general and specific signification. This category distinction has to do with how the word "word" follows under the general definition of "sign" but means specifically linguistic signs and not, say, pictograms. Sign means "more" than "word" in terms of its ability to signify.
They will, of course, parse this further in the next section.
Wednesday, July 15, 2015
The Teacher, Part Two: The Nature of Signs
The discussion continues with an agreement: words are signs.
Adeodatus and Augustine unpack the meaning of the sentence: "if nothing from so great a city it pleases the gods be left...". The conversation becomes stuck on the word "nothing." How can a word signify "no" thing if, by the very definition, it has to signify something?
What strikes me here is that they are practicing a very slow, very intense close reading, but predicating that each word must signify an object. This is going to be important for Augustine later in the debate so that he prove that words are misleading (and by extension words are necessary for faith). Augustine runs into problems with the word "nothing." To get out of this sticky wicket they include "states of mind" as also being signified in words.
As they unpack the sentence, they also come up with these rules of signification and what we don't necessarily need to signify:
a) things we are not doing when we are asked about them and can do them on the spot (without signs--and this aspect is going to come back in future discussions).
b) the very signs we happen to be doing (for example, walking).
This then turns to a discussion about the division of signs themselves which I will deal with in the next blog.
Adeodatus and Augustine unpack the meaning of the sentence: "if nothing from so great a city it pleases the gods be left...". The conversation becomes stuck on the word "nothing." How can a word signify "no" thing if, by the very definition, it has to signify something?
What strikes me here is that they are practicing a very slow, very intense close reading, but predicating that each word must signify an object. This is going to be important for Augustine later in the debate so that he prove that words are misleading (and by extension words are necessary for faith). Augustine runs into problems with the word "nothing." To get out of this sticky wicket they include "states of mind" as also being signified in words.
As they unpack the sentence, they also come up with these rules of signification and what we don't necessarily need to signify:
a) things we are not doing when we are asked about them and can do them on the spot (without signs--and this aspect is going to come back in future discussions).
b) the very signs we happen to be doing (for example, walking).
This then turns to a discussion about the division of signs themselves which I will deal with in the next blog.
Monday, July 6, 2015
The Teacher, Part One: The Purpose of Language
This debate is between Augustine and his 16-year-old son, Adeodatus. The edited edition I am using divides the dialogue into specific themes and topics. I'll follow that pattern in the blog posts.
Part One: The Purpose of Language
The debate opens with a discussion of the purpose of speaking. Adeodatus posits that to speak is to teach or learn. Augustine does not agree. For him, teaching is the purpose of speaking. Adeodatus argues that one is not necessarily teaching when one is singing. So, Augustine puts an amend on it--how about the purpose of language is to teach AND to remind ourselves (spoiler: this is going to be his conclusion, as well).
Augustine side-steps Adeodatus' challenge by suggesting that singing and speaking are two different things and that singing sometimes does not involve words (for example, bird singing). Thus, speaking words is for teaching and reminding. Adeodatus agrees. What Augustine seems to be missing here is how birds may actually be using singing. Singing is not merely aesthetic, which Augustine seems to be implying. But, he leaves behind the problem of singing to pursue speech itself.
Prayer, though, is not speaking. It happens in the mind because God does not need teaching (and Augustine will posit later on that God is the only true teacher, we're, at best, mimes). Prayer happens in the "inner man"--in the "bedchamber of the heart" and the "temple of the mind" so there is no need for speaking in prayer. Thus, when Jesus taught the disciples, he was teaching then the words to pray with. Thus when we pray, we are not teaching but "reminding" ourselves of Jesus--thus "the words are signs come to mind." Augustine concludes then that prayer is a kind of internal speaking, not external, used to remind ourselves, not teach God.
In this initial section, I can sense Augustine's need to think about the purpose of words. In later sections, he will expound on thinking about signification of words and their use and how this effects speech, knowledge, and learning.
Part One: The Purpose of Language
The debate opens with a discussion of the purpose of speaking. Adeodatus posits that to speak is to teach or learn. Augustine does not agree. For him, teaching is the purpose of speaking. Adeodatus argues that one is not necessarily teaching when one is singing. So, Augustine puts an amend on it--how about the purpose of language is to teach AND to remind ourselves (spoiler: this is going to be his conclusion, as well).
Augustine side-steps Adeodatus' challenge by suggesting that singing and speaking are two different things and that singing sometimes does not involve words (for example, bird singing). Thus, speaking words is for teaching and reminding. Adeodatus agrees. What Augustine seems to be missing here is how birds may actually be using singing. Singing is not merely aesthetic, which Augustine seems to be implying. But, he leaves behind the problem of singing to pursue speech itself.
Prayer, though, is not speaking. It happens in the mind because God does not need teaching (and Augustine will posit later on that God is the only true teacher, we're, at best, mimes). Prayer happens in the "inner man"--in the "bedchamber of the heart" and the "temple of the mind" so there is no need for speaking in prayer. Thus, when Jesus taught the disciples, he was teaching then the words to pray with. Thus when we pray, we are not teaching but "reminding" ourselves of Jesus--thus "the words are signs come to mind." Augustine concludes then that prayer is a kind of internal speaking, not external, used to remind ourselves, not teach God.
In this initial section, I can sense Augustine's need to think about the purpose of words. In later sections, he will expound on thinking about signification of words and their use and how this effects speech, knowledge, and learning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)