Print

Print


From: Sara Trevisan [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Since "Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty" was not intended as a tautology (no
matter who the speaker is), the problem is just to understand which is the
hyponym and which is the hypernym -- that is, is Beauty a part of Truth, or
vice versa?
[Peter Montgomery] ===========================
Perhaps from the 17th Century ov which Eliot sometimes put on, one
culd see it in a different way:

It is a metaphysical conceit insofar as it makes a radical leap that
is not easily explainable by logic. On the other hand it lacks the
immediacy of the odour of a rose, because, weirdly enough for a
statement involving beauty, it does not involve the senses.

Of course the world of Plationic, dvine ideas by definiion
transcends the senses to a condition not of slow rotation
suggestng permanence, but of actual permanence itself,
to answer the queston how much DOES a Grecian urn?

I'm with yu Ken, although I could believe you wouldn't want
it known.

Cheers,
Peter