That’s Plato’s well-known query from the writing generally known as the State, which has lasted for hundreds of years as a result of it’s true and I’ve the impression – all of the extra true even in these “out-of-date” occasions the place “fashions”, “copies” and “simulacrums” have lengthy been in circulation with out us fairly conscious of their presence and distinction, simply as there isn’t a reply to the query: Who, actually, was Plato or Socrates, his trainer, who is claimed to have danced barefoot within the squares of Athens, though this query nonetheless stays open. Time passes and this query stays legitimate.
My pal additionally reached the age of seventy and fifty years of literary work, which this memorial speaks of. A memorial is a literary type wherein the poet’s pals discuss their poet pal on this event, and I guarantee you that it’s no small factor to have a poet as a pal on this time when books are “disappearing” and maybe artwork itself, which is misplaced and enters this world simulacrum, which is not straightforward to know. Even for those who name this failure, or lack of illustration, post-philosophy, which it could be (and I do not know what it’s), if it isn’t this modern hybrid simulacrum, which isn’t a lie however a “fact”.
Is it the distinctive privilege of poets immediately, this “fact” or “lie” on this resistance to modern simulacrums and their battle with fashions and copies that had been as soon as the temple of fact. This protection of the simulacrum and the appropriate to the “noble lie”, which philosophy has misplaced in its effort to outlive because the “queen of the sciences”.
As a result of post-philosophy is barely a technical time period, or a collective time period for “chaos” on this simulacrum, or a collection of poetic and philosophical types and techniques – which is appropriate as a traditionally contingent syntagm, which factors to deep and sophisticated connections between philosophy and poetry, which neither immediately they’re no clearer than in Plato’s time, if there may be any reply in any respect to the query: Who was Plato? Within the time of these “previous” and “new barbarians”, about whom Nietzsche wrote.
As an instance that this monument, and impartial of this modern disaster of illustration, wherein not solely books are “disappearing”, and to begin with poetry, but additionally different arts, there may be speak, not with out purpose, concerning the “demise of the portray” (easel work). or (atonal) music (who listens to Šenberg immediately?, about whom Dragana Jeremić – Molnar wrote an distinctive e book), for instance that this memorial, or no less than this introductory essay, is conceived as an previous Greek feast the place this query is mentioned: Do poets lie? And why did Plato recommend that poets needs to be expelled from the perfect state, which is a destiny that has already befallen many poets after Plato.
As an instance that at this very best feast, this dialogue is held between poets, philosophers, theologians and scientists concerning the query of “fact”, that’s, the query: Do poets lie?
So this can be a debate concerning the fact. And poetry, as a result of the position of the poet has modified immediately.
The theologian, as indicated, doesn’t ask this query concerning the fact, as a result of as it’s written within the epistle: “Look, the ft of the one who will convey him are already on the threshold!” In any case, who’s a mortal to hunt a solution to this query about truths to which solely God is aware of the reply. It’s fascinating that on this assortment – a monument devoted to the poetry of Svetislav Brković – the least consideration is paid to the non secular facet of his poetry, so I’ll discuss that a bit later. In addition to the poet himself, a very powerful participant on this dialogue remains to be the thinker, though the modern disaster of illustration testifies to the truth that we’re left with out a clear thought of the place of the thinker on this dialogue.
Who’s a thinker immediately and the way far does his competence or legitimation lengthen, which, for instance, Lyotard writes about in “Postmodern state” or “conditionality”, which is a extra sufficient title of his well-known essay on the standing of latest science. It’s usually forgotten that Lyotard’s experiment, which grew to become the progenitor of postmodernism in philosophy, is nothing greater than a dialogue of the state or standing of latest science and his conclusion that philosophy has entered this postmodern conditionality or instability as a result of its disaster is, actually, to begin with, the disaster of legitimacy of contemporary science itself. Which means philosophy has misplaced the facility of legitimation, that’s, justification or basis or, in easier phrases, rationalization of science. She, who was the “queen of science” which implies that philosophy was this information about science – or one “large story” about science and fact. This phantasm, in spite of everything, gave authority to Plato’s accusation or query, for the reason that thinker was the one who is aware of what the reality is and who basically speaks the reality or lies, as Plato himself expressed it. It was like that for hundreds of years. The thinker was on the throne, he knew the character of the scientific methodology and science itself. He was, so to talk, the topic of this very best aspect. From Aristotle to Husserl and the modern disaster of legitimacy. So that’s the distinction between a thinker and a post-philosopher.
The thinker remains to be the topic or publican of “fact”. He is aware of the immanent rhythm of ideas, as a result of philosophy is ready to specific “the thing’s personal self”.
However, the post-philosopher is witness to the truth that the idea of philosophical proof has been misplaced, as a result of science and philosophy are not synonymous, because the thinker claimed. The post-philosopher is not the topic and publican of science. That is the distinction. Science was left with out legitimation. It not exists due to the self-movement of the idea and the rhythm of the natural complete. Neither is it an instantaneous “logically decided being”.
I lately wrote concerning the idea of illustration in philosophy, and it was a chance to remind myself of the extent to which the idea of science was dominant in philosophy till Husserl. Kant was a metaphysician of science. Normally, German idealism and phenomenology had been nothing however “philosophy of science”. However, a failed philosophy. Science is left with out philosophy and philosophy with out science. It’s a modern state of affairs that led to the so-called hermeneutic flip in considering, which I wrote about in relation to Brković’s poetry, as a result of this flip in the direction of language led to the modern supremacy of poetry over philosophy, which can culminate in Heidegger’s dialogue with Helderilna in two of his well-known passages . “Language is the home of being” and “Poetically, man dwells on this earth.” So, not religiously or scientifically, however exactly poetically. This was the epilogue of Heidegger’s dialogue not solely with Helderlin but additionally with philosophy itself after Husserl and his failure to clarify science.
So, after faith, science and philosophy, there stays poetry and the poet’s activity to clarify man’s “residence” or “home” on this earth. That was the place to begin of my interpretation of Brković’s poetry and poetics. This lofty activity that the poet took upon himself at a time when philosophical illustration got here to a disaster, changing into post-philosophical and poetic, since poetic simulacrums usually are not a lie however the fact about ourselves, as a result of the unique non secular, scientific or philosophical fashions – don’t exist. Copies and simulacrums stay.
(…) In truth, immediately we do not even have ideas, now we have screens and their simulacrums, which, nevertheless, usually are not our lies however the fact. And no “publish” as a chronological or temporal willpower encompasses this case which is barely conditionally philosophical or poetic. As a result of screens or know-how don’t write philosophy or poetry. Nor can I.
That’s the reason not solely poetry but additionally Plato’s query is a mimetic or museum query. The time is coming when Plato is not going to exist. A time wherein there shall be no poetry and maybe no individuals in a posthuman backyard wherein I can already see a commotion of posthuman creatures like robots, cyborgs, androids… a time with out recollections of “Home” the place language and solitude nonetheless reside in a metaphysical language that not exists title. A time with out God, philosophy, science and poetry. How that? Is that the epilogue of this dialogue?
Do poets lie? How that?
Sure, I needed to say one thing about Brković’s religiosity. His faith is inside the bounds of a pure poetic thoughts. On this faith there isn’t a revelation however there may be poetry. That is what I can say.
The writers of this Memorial differ: along with philosophers, literary theorists, literary critics, poets, and essayists wrote about Brković’s poetry. There aren’t a lot of them. And there should not be any. However the outlines of a poetics may be glimpsed from these critically written texts. There are poets who write a poetic canon and poets with out this canon.
The poetic canon of my precious pal on this monument is interpreted as naturalism and poetic rigor that explores the boundaries of language, a poetic experiment that’s at one stage near signalism and the alerts of language, indicators whose hint or situation is mild and never voice, and naturally as a metaphysical canon – since individuals mistakenly imagine that moments can proceed, as Žarko Đurović wrote.
And if individuals imagine wrongly, then they lie metaphysically. A lie is a situation of fact right here.
That can be the reply to Plato’s query. This protection of poetry since in poetry the figures of evil are literally types of Good.
Information
