I could natter on here about my thoughts in the matter, but I think it will yield me more if I just read your answers to my question without trying to 'clarify' the question further, constraining you to answer a question made perhaps too narrow by my mistaken assumptions as to what constitutes 'clarification' .
Perhaps I'll think better thoughts after you tell me yours.
2007-07-09 05:55:39 · 9 answers · asked by skumpfsklub 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I've always thought of metaphor as being the gap between what is said and what is meant, but that doesn't seem to cover metaphor either. I like what you suggest as a definition for metaphor; the problem lies in defining what poetry (and, for that matter, philosophy) is. There is no real answer to what constitutes poetry, and there are many branches of philosophy. It is so problematic coming up with THE definitive answer to what a particular idea means, and metaphor is such a huge concept. So much of communication relies on metaphor, but not all communication relies on either poetry or philosophy. What you posit is interesting and clearly well thought-out, but I'm not sure if anyone will ever come up with an adequate or definitive meaning for metaphor. I don't think you're far off the mark--I just think the mark is impossible to hit. Excellent question btw.
2007-07-09 06:09:24 · answer #1 · answered by teeleecee 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think of a metaphore as a comparison. Some say we think in comparisons. I think truth and beauty intersect. A thought is better put when put poetically and more rememberable. It's more likely an intuitive thought and true, when it alliterates and possibly even rhymes. I don't know why that is, I suppose the mind is beautiful. Philosopy is love of knowledge or perhaps it's even of 'knowing', sensing, sensible. All life seems to intersect, maybe always when we're in harmony with it. Wow, that question's a lot to think about.
2007-07-09 13:12:40 · answer #2 · answered by hb12 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You're not too far off the mark at all. Greece produced substantive contributions on each topic. Homer and Hesiod obviously employed metaphor in their epic poetry. On the other hand, Aristotle was the first philosopher to formulate a comprehensive theory of metaphor. You might want to see what Immanuel Kant and Hannah Arendt have written about metaphors.
2007-07-09 13:04:53 · answer #3 · answered by sokrates 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Great question!!!!
I do so love the ones that really push the bounds.
Consider perhaps, if you will, that metaphor itself belongs at the edge of a transcendent realm, so it can't be conceptualized truly as a 'point' of intersection....only as a vast shadowy truth that remains elusive of human thought..and that poetry and philosophy aim at 'alluding to' that shadowy truth but can't really ever intersect it.
In my humble opinion....
Metaphor strikes me as humanity's attempt at reaching 'the realm of the gods'. The most profound commonalities of humanity's search for 'ultimate truth', so to speak, can not be expressed adequately in the literal...in prose...but can only be alluded to through metaphor.
Poetry and philosophy (I would also add art and music, even theatre and literature in some cases)...are, to me,in their truest sense, the best attempt at alluding metaphorically to that which transcends humanity...in the highest manner humanly possible.
I would also add...
I find it greatly disturbing that so much of philosophy has 'debased' itself by blending with the literal...trying to analyze and catalog in 'sterile' literal fashion, 'logically', even...the transcendence of the metaphor...and killing the beauty of it in the process....(Yes, I indict Aristotle on that charge...Socrates must have rolled over in his grave when he saw those writings and teachings.....LMAO)
I recognize that every mind processes information in its own unique fashion...BUT...
I submit that philosophy and poetry 'ought to' strive to remain true to the metaphorical, as close to the transcendent as human language allows, refusing to 'stoop' to the literal, thereby remaining a broader horizon for human consciousness to strive to expand to.
It is the purpose of the poet and the philosopher to 'set the bar' so that human consciousness continually seeks to rise to it, not to lower the bar so that it is more easily grasped.
One man's opinion, for as much or as little as it may be worth.
2007-07-09 13:44:46 · answer #4 · answered by Chance M 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not far off at all. Cf Derrida's "White Mythology: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy" for one view of this interdependency.
2007-07-09 14:54:48 · answer #5 · answered by Michael_Dorfman 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
+ marks the spot
i guess philosophy seeks the truth behind the beauty and poetry seeks the beauty behind the truth. so where they meet we see the world as we percieve it, our own metaphor.
"life's a stage..." i believe this quote (depending on how you interpret) is a good example of what i think you're trying to convey.
2007-07-09 13:30:23 · answer #6 · answered by Charlie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well if you belive a person cant really understand those topics maybe that is where you should start your philosophy on poetry
2007-07-09 12:59:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Bullseye.
Beautiful...
2007-07-10 13:48:20 · answer #8 · answered by amp 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
how about 'paraphrase is the crossroad of quote and fiction'
2007-07-09 14:44:47 · answer #9 · answered by Daniel F 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋