/lit/ - Literature

Here's another chart from that earlier thread. I didn't make this one.

Sister Miriam Joseph has another book called Shakespeare's Use of the Arts of Language which is published as a companion to her trivium book by the same publisher. I've seen it used by itself in some rhetoric classes. The book also got positive reviews from Harold Bloom.

>>17539354
That sounds promising. Someone was saying she's too old-fashioned Thomist to be relevant or worth paying attention too, but that's probably extreme. I have similar complaints about Wolfgang Smith but he's still brilliant and worth reading.

>>17539266
Isn't it kind of pointless to study Latin from this perspective, people studied it then because it was the most spoken language. The lingua franca now is English rather than Latin. So studying Latin now would be like studying a dead language when Rome still existed.

>>17539434
Obviously I'm not saying there is no value in studying or knowing Latin, far from it. Rather than it doesn't seem to make sense to study it from a rhetorical perspective, you're not going to be arguing or writing in latin in the modern world. The equivalent at this point would most likely be English.

>>17539434
I would counter that one of the best way to study the English language is to learn Latin. It will open up deeper understandings for lots of English vocabulary words and a broader understanding of grammar in general, including the mechanics of the English language.

>>17539461
Latin, or really any other language that has pretty complex grammar, like German, makes you think about how words work in ways you just don't think in English, and therefore it helps you think *about* English better.

>>17539393
>Someone was saying she's too old-fashioned Thomist to be relevant or worth paying attention too, but that's probably extreme.
Treating Aristotle's categories as fact is extreme. So is constantly thinking in terms of form and matter. I'm with you on the importance of understanding language, but this book is full of outdated thinking not only in psychology etc., but in the core subject it tackles.
>>17539266
Why do you want to learn the trivium?
>>17539282
I'm guessing this was made by someone who was under a great impression of Adler's comments on the liberal arts. They proceeded to make a chart with unread books and slapped a pretentious description on it. Modern adaptation of the trivium my ass. A modern adaptation of the trivium would have a modern approach to learning how to reason and argue. How to develop your mind(set), so you're empowered to learn anything and how to effectively convey your thoughts. That's what liberal arts were fundamentally about. Learning details of grammar from a reference textbook towards this goal is hilariously misguided.

>>17539266
That rhetoric list is particularly silly, especially the inclusion of Aristotle’s (a dialectician) treatise.

>>17540261
This is the biggest pleb post on /lit/ currently. Imagine getting filtered this hard by Aristotle.

>>17539434
That's the point. The older and the more useless the language is the more patrician it is.

>he doesn't know ancient Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Arabic, Persian, and Welsh
yikes!

>>17540261
>Aristotle is outdated
Anon, I...

>>17540562
Stop spouting buzzwords for once and tell me exactly what you imagine I don't understand, if you can.

>>17540595
>Arabic

>>17540618
ywnbaw

>>17540603
you what?

>>17540618
Not him, but when it comes to form and matter (and lots of other aspects of Aristotle's philosophy), the only way you can rationally dispute him is by taking up Kant's position (which isn't necessarily self-evidently better because it's more recent - in some sense Kant is autistic in his own way and is not obviously correct). Anything else is one of two things: You haven't read Aristotle, particularly his Metaphysics, so you don't even know his arguments and what you're disputing, or second, you're actively trying to lambast Aristotle because you can't critically engage with his philosophy.

For example, take the four Aristotelian causes. Give me your best argument as to why only two of them are relevant (typically people will claim only the efficient and material causes are "real", and the rest is made up, without actually dealing with Aristotle's argument for their reality).

>>17540261
>extreme
>outdated thinking
I want to know which degenerate moderns in particular you believe surpassed the Thomists. Aristotle (ﷺ) is in his infancy

>>17540694
>>17540714
Great refutation of fuck knows what. My point is about Sister's Joseph's approach to teaching language arts through aristotelian lens. Do you even know what I'm referring to or are you talking out of your asses?

Do I need to read the Greeks before hitting the Trivium?

>>17540738
My argument is that I want to suck Aristotle's cock no homo

>>17540759
No, in fact, you should go through the Trivium before you even begin with the Greeks or more specifically before you get into Plato and Aristotle so you can actually properly learn what you read

>>17540261
I beg you then for the good of humanity make a better chart than that one. A bigger one could incorporate more modern stuff, yes. The point of the one I made was it was an attempt to learn both ancient and modern ideas, and yes obviously because I'm interested in the trivium and quadrivium I think the ancients have something to teach us.

>>17539266
>quadrivium
Now you're getting into /sci/ territory there.
However, regarding what you said about
>we would basically have a full curricula that you could just follow that would replace and be a lot better than the typical four year liberal arts college education, which is pretty much a waste of time and money.
It is always a good idea to simply add pic related as St John's is essentially what you're saying, but with tuition paying for the tutoring of experts in the field.