 |
 |
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