On Being Left-Wingish (?)
Around 200 years ago, two German bigwigs had a row over the question of 'marriage'. One rather Left-Wingish (?) poet called Friedrich von Schlegel (1772 - 1829) wrote an unfinished 'romance' (once again, in the technical sense) called Lucinde where he eulogised the notion of the fulfillment of reciprocal love with no need for religious sanction or public ceremony. To this came the sharp criticism from a formidable Father-always-knows-what-is-best-for-you Right-Wingish (?) philosopher called Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770 - 1831) : 'Friedrich v. Schlegel in his Lucinde, and a follower of his ..., have put forward the view that the wedding ceremony is superfluous and a formality which might be discarded. Their reason is that love is, so they say, the substance of marriage and that the celebration therefore detracts from its worth.'
Enough, then, has been said (although in my highly oblique ironical style) to indicate why I am always so much more comfortable in the presence of Left-Wingish (?) people.
(Historical note : Anticipating the Hollywood practice of coming up with sequels by more than one century, the story of the Right-Wingish (?) Hegel does not end there. There came along yet another ponderous German called Karl Marx who claimed that he had turned the philosophy of Hegel upside down. To which I can only say : 'Quite rightly' (no pun intended)).
12 Comments:
At 19.5.05, Anonymous said…
What is the notion of reciprocal love?
At 19.5.05, The Transparent Ironist said…
There can be no THE notion of reciprocal love, simply because one can argue till the end of time over what 'love' is. I shall 'define' love somewhat abruptly as : The realisation that someone other than you exists. When two people realise this simultaneously in each other's company, it is reciprocal love which involves a more or less clear understanding of each other's expectations.
At 19.5.05, Anonymous said…
means do you mean in any ways love or reciprocal love involves two people? I mean it is in bidimensional. It is not unidimensional or multidimensional.
At 19.5.05, The Transparent Ironist said…
Love cannot be unidimensional. (Or, at least, I fail to see how it could be so.) However, love is usually multidimensional : we love different human beings (and, sometimes, even pet-animals and birds) in different ways. We love our parents (or, at least, usually), our friends, our work-mates, our spouses, and our teachers : all in highly contextualised ways.
At 19.5.05, Anonymous said…
yes! I mean to ask about its one-to-one correspendence.....??
At 19.5.05, The Transparent Ironist said…
For 1-to-1 correspondence(s), I recommend that you study a book of algebraic topology or abstract number theory. These, however, do not exist in multi-dimensional loves.
At 19.5.05, Anonymous said…
unfortunately there are no emotions in algebraic topology or abstract number theory so one can't study those in the context of 1-to-1 correspondence in love.
And you yourself denyed the unidimensionality of a love.
BTW I am reading your posts since long time.....in one of your previous posts long back I remember you have written something regarding..."love is not blind but it ......." can you recall it for me...I think it was your original one.
At 19.5.05, Anonymous said…
Yes!! I found it out...words are not same but really it is original and real...
"(C) The new skeptics like to congratulate themselves on having discovered the truth that love is blind. As a matter of fact, however, it is they who are blind for they do not perceive that it is love that truly enables a person to see."
At 19.5.05, Anonymous said…
the right way to love the TI would be the wrong way and the left way, the right.
and the TI has always loved me the left way
At 20.5.05, Anonymous said…
....perhaps
At 22.5.05, Anonymous said…
Though it's very late to ask but my question is for TI...
Is there any difference between love and respect? as your definition of 'love' sounds emerging in 'respect' as well....may be it is on to correspondence and not one-to-one...
At 22.5.05, The Transparent Ironist said…
But of course there is. Respect is a universal set of which love is a subset. I can respect human beings whom I do not love as subjects with an inviolable dignity.
Post a Comment
<< Home