Chapter 61 Seven HERACLITUS Ⅲ aesthetic world view

Philosophy in the Age of Greek Tragedy Seven HERACLITUS Ⅲ aesthetic world view 7.1 Aesthetic Intuition for "World Game" Blasphemy, that sinister word, is indeed for every Heraclitan the touchstone by which he will show whether he understands or misunderstands his master.Is there evil, injustice, contradiction, suffering in this world? Yes, Heraclitus declares, but only to narrow-minded men who see things in isolation rather than in connection, not to the God who sees the whole.For the latter, all contradictions converge into harmony, and although this cannot be seen by ordinary eyes, it can be realized by a god who is close to contemplation like Heraclitus.From the point of view of his golden eyes, the world that populates around him is free from an iota of injustice.Even such a fundamental conflict as the incorporation of pure fire into such an impure form is overcome by him with a sublime metaphor.

Becoming and passing away, constructing and destroying, cannot be judged by any morality, they are always equally innocent, and in this world are only the games of artists and children.As children and artists play, so does the Eternal Living Fire play, building and destroying, guiltlessly--a game that aeons of ages amuse themselves.It transforms itself into water and earth, like a child making sand and destroying the sand by the sea.It keeps restarting the game.It satisfies for a moment, and then the need takes hold of it again, just as the need to create drives the artist.Not the lure of crime, but the ever-reawakening impulse to play, calling other worlds into life.The child dropped the toy for a moment, but was soon playing again without worry.And so long as he builds, he weaves, connects, and shapes lawfully according to an inner order.

Only an aesthetic person can see the world in this way. From the artist and the production process of artworks, he understands how the struggle of "many" itself can contain rules and laws after all, and how artists can override artworks with a calm attitude. , and being actively placed in the artwork, how inevitable and game, conflict and harmony must mate and give birth to the artwork. Who would now demand from such a philosophy an ethics and the categorical imperative "Thou shalt," or even accuse Heraclitus of such a defect!If "freedom" means that man can change his nature at will, like changing clothes, is such a stupid claim, then man is a necessity from the beginning to the end, to the last fiber of his being, and is absolutely "no". free".Every serious philosophy throughout the ages has rejected this freedom with justifiable irony.Those who live consciously in logos ("reason") and look down on the universe with the eyes of an artist are very rare, because when "the damp mud takes over the soul" man's eyes and ears , and even the whole understanding of man, has become a poor instrument.Why things are as they are is not asked; just as it is also not asked why fire changed to water and earth.Heraclitus certainly had no reason to prove—just as Leibnitz had reason to prove—that this world is the best of all possible worlds.It was enough for him that the world was the beautiful, innocent game of ages.

7.2 A Worldview Beyond Morality According to Heraclitus, man in general is even an irrational being.But this is not contradicted by the fact that throughout the whole nature of man run through the governing laws of reason.Man does not occupy a particularly privileged position in nature, the highest phenomenon of which is fire, like the stars, and not simple-minded man.Man is a more rational being if he maintains his participation in the fire by necessity.If he was born from water and earth, his rationality is bad.There is no obligation as if, because he is human, he must know the Logos.But why is there water and why is there soil?For Heraclitus, this question is much more serious than asking why people are so stupid and bad.The same inner lawfulness and justice are manifested in the highest and most perversity.

However, if one were to try to push Heraclitus: why wasn't fire always fire, why is it now water and now earth?Then, he can only answer like this: "It's a game, please don't take it too seriously, especially don't take it morally!" the joy with which the artist contemplates the work he is creating.He is brooding, melancholy, mournful, sinister, irascible, pessimistic, and, in a word, hateful only to those who are dissatisfied with his true portrayal of people, and for good reason.But he must have cared little for such people, with their disapproval and sympathy, their hatred and love, and returned them with the instruction: "A dog always barks at a man he does not know," or, "Donkeys love dogs." Chaff is better than gold."

These disaffected people also often lament the obscurity of Heraclitus' style.In fact, almost no one writes more freshly and clearly than him.Of course, he writes very succinctly, so for those readers who read ten lines at a glance, he is indeed obscure.However, however much a philosopher should be deliberately vague (as Heraclitus is wont to be accused of), if he had no reason to hide his thought, or was not so wicked as to use words to cover up his poverty of thought, it would be entirely inexplicable. up.As Schopenhauer said, even in the affairs of daily life, a person must be cautious and try to speak clearly, so as to avoid possible misunderstandings; How about ambiguously, or even guessing, what philosophy wants to express in terms of its mission?As for brevity, Jean Paul has a good lesson:

On the whole, if all great things--things that mean much to a few minds--are expressed only so succinctly and (therefore) so obscurely that an empty mind would rather interpret it as gibberish than translate For their own shallow thoughts, then this is right.For the vulgar mind has a detestable skill of seeing nothing in the deepest and richest maxims but their own common ones. Incidentally, despite all this, Heraclitus did not escape the "empty mind".The Stoics have superficially misinterpreted him, pulling his basic aesthetic intuitions about the world game into a banal concern for the purposiveness of the world, and a concern for human interests at that.Thus, in their minds, his physics becomes a crude optimism and constantly prompts Johnny to "friendly applause" (plaudite amici).