No-one has thought it was all Shakespeare for decades. That Marlowe collaborated is possibly relevant here inasmuch as he was university educated and ...
Your speculation seems pretty good. All we need is some suggestion from someone that such a trope, whether as parlour game or not, was indeed in circu...
The scene has a Chaucerian flavour, you’re right, but the specific trope of argument? Don’t know, haven’t read him. No, not looking for a paper topic,...
Now we’re getting somewhere. Yes a “philosophers’ parlour game” is the kind of thing I think it might be. And yes the philosophical interest (if any) ...
Very nearly. I don’t think Shakespeare was inspired by or even interested in a current philosophical dispute. He had a dramatic purpose which was to s...
Further to 'understanding X' in previous post: what does 'exist' mean? If by definition God is outside nature, what kind of existence are we talking a...
X=God or gods exist ‘X is true’=theism ‘X is false’= atheism ‘X is either true or false but I don’t know which’=agnosticism There are more positions. ...
The point is clear in the thread. Not the scene’s significance in the play but the significance if any of the philosophy used in the scene. The questi...
Yes there is but having read some Bacon it's clearly nonsense. One of them writes weightlessly, the other leadenly, and at the risk of upsetting NKBJ ...
Well that's the reductive account and you may be right (though it does imply that Shakespeare was not a good judge of what's interesting). The questio...
But that's what's interesting (if it is): that a later debate is prefigured in a little exchange in Shakespeare which I think he got secondhand from s...
On second thought it’s not simply the use of analogical reasoning, it’s the wedge driven between the ability to perceive things and the ability to nam...
Lots of people are philosophical but not philosophers. And I’m not on the attack. And whether Shak was a philosopher doesn’t matter. I’m only asking i...
Lots of people are philosophical but not philosophers. And I’m not on the attack. And whether Shak was a philosopher doesn’t matter. I’m only asking i...
"is the courtier supersmart or just not as gullible as the rest?" Whichever you like but what makes it interesting on the stage is that the blind guy ...
"He does too well on the vision test" doesn't really capture what happens. It suggests he was caught out because he identified colours correctly. But ...
If it were obvious it would not be dramatically interesting (the episode is meant to show how, unlike all around him, the courtier is supersmart) and ...
Comments