[PREV - THE_GREAT_DEBATE]    [TOP]

FULL_MONTAIGNE


                                              March 12, 2005

Paul Graham invokes Montaigne in an          THE_GREAT_DEBATE
argument *against* debate.  The irony
of that is so heavy, it seems like an
intentional joke: Montaigne's most        If you want the *real*
famous work is "On the Art of             full Montaigne, there's
Conversation", a hymn to intellectual     the "complete essays"
stimulation through argument.             as translated by
                                          Charles Cotton
   But then a close reading               available on-line from
   of the Montaigne shows                 the Gutenberg project.
   that he distinguishes
   between "conversation"                 In that Charles
   and mere "debating".                   Cotton, translation,
                                          the title is rendered
   This distinction being                 as "The Art of
   that in debate you're                  Conference".
   taught only how to make
   the other side look bad,                   Possibly just a funky translation
   and in conversation you                    (from the 1600s, after all) but
   should be listening for                    it suggests some subtleties may
   corrections of your                        be in play here hidden behind the
   mistakes, rather than                      usual English translation.
   trying to sweep your
   errors under the rug.                            ("The Art of
                                                      Intercourse"?)
An overview of the structure and
themes of "Conversation":

o   Introductory remarks about
    the virtues of learning by
    counter-example, stating          These remarks may
    that he is going to use his       seem out of place:
    own behavior as an example
    of what should be avoided.           What do they
                                         have to do with
                                         the following
o   The major theme:                     discussion?
    the importance of
    receptiveness to                         I think the answer is that
    counter-argument.                        both are about developing
                                             through contention, by
                                             embracing the contrary.
o   The problem with pedants.
    segues into this by making the                UNINTENDED
    point that they're often
    terrible at reasoned debate:
    they resort to bluster, insult;
    they try to brow-beat with       The general point is
    learned quotation, etc.          that we should be
                                     receptive to truth,
                                     not impressed by
   And after returning               mere authority.
   to his first two themes
   he goes into...

o  The closing discussion
   on Tacitus                     It may look like he's
                                  wandered far afield,
                                  but I think there's a
                                  subtle thread throughout:

                                  At this point he argues
                                  that you should avoid
                                  excessive faith in
                                  your own judgement --
                                                           Just as you
                                     He praises            should be
                                     Tacitus for           open to
                                     passing on all        correction
                                     the evidence,         from others;
                                     even when             you should
                                     Tacitus               avoid fanatical
                                     himself doubts        imposition of
      In general, this is a          it's utility.         your opinions
      tremendously tight                                   on others...
      essay: it looks far
      more discursive than
      it is -- it sticks to     This essay's main weakness
      one central concern,      is it's disingenous
      coming at it from         self-deprecation.
      different angles.
                                         In the introduction, Montaigne
                                         claims he will try to show the
                                         correct path by describing his own
                                         errors, but the following essay is
                                         obviously, indisputably Montaigne
                                         bragging about his open-mindedness.

                                         He's tremendously proud of his love
                                         of argument; and his claim that he
                                         has a great fault -- he's sometimes
   Truly a great essay....               impatient with fools -- seems forced.

   I've been thinking                    And throughout his complaints about
   about inventing a                     pedantry, he is always at pains to
   new slashdot id                       distinguish between the truly
   to use for nothing                    erudite and his own poor knowledge --
   but appropriate                       but the essay is thoroughly
   quotations from                       drenched in references to classical
   "The Art of                           literature.
   Conversation"
                                           Granted that we're
                                           easily impressed these
                                           days, but still:
   PRIMARY_MONTAIGNER
                                           Has there ever been such a
                                           blatant example of false
                                           modesty?




--------
[NEXT - PRIMARY_MONTAIGNER]