That's fair, but I feel like the intended experience is everyone being flummoxed by this or that specific passage, to the point that it has gained iconic status. Being flummoxed by your own personally generated weird passage just hasn't got the community, ya know?
Yeah, I think this is right to some extent. For the vast majority of people, you're not reading Aristotle for the content (at least not in the sense that's well-captured by a summary). That is, we don't generally read Aristotle because he was right about a bunch of things. The value is in following the chain of reasoning and seeing how it gave rise to many, many of the questions we're still grappling with today. Reading a summary is basically useless, because if you've grown up anywhere in , you've already absorbed Aristotle at that level. It's part of the structure of Angloid thought at a deep level.
That's fair, but I feel like the intended experience is everyone being flummoxed by this or that specific passage, to the point that it has gained iconic status. Being flummoxed by your own personally generated weird passage just hasn't got the community, ya know?
Yeah, I think this is right to some extent. For the vast majority of people, you're not reading Aristotle for the content (at least not in the sense that's well-captured by a summary). That is, we don't generally read Aristotle because he was right about a bunch of things. The value is in following the chain of reasoning and seeing how it gave rise to many, many of the questions we're still grappling with today. Reading a summary is basically useless, because if you've grown up anywhere in
, you've already absorbed Aristotle at that level. It's part of the structure of Angloid thought at a deep level.
Absolutely true