The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Erasmus and a theory of knoweldge and good fellowship

I wonder if anyone has any thoughts on Erasmus’s theory of knowledge (described below) and its usefulness for good fellowship? Erasmus was a great scholar of the Bible, a great scholar of Origen, and his thinking and emphasis on moderation had a big influence on the early modern universalists from Hans Denck onwards. Can we learn from him?

The ‘Praise of Folly’ is a satire on human knowledge by Erasmus owing much to the book of Ecclesiastes, among other sources. The book is the occasion for Dame Folly to praise herself at length by showing how her cult is at the centre of all human affairs. The satire of the book is extreme, but it has a serious message. Erasmus’s goal is not to promote scepticism for its own sake but to lead others through to a better appreciation of the experience of discovering true wisdom and the hard ordeal by which we come to it through our own folly. Erasmus would have agreed that knowledge sometimes makes us miserable. But Erasmus has Folly assert that it is only because of her existence that knowledge does not always make us miserable. Folly affirms that humans pursuing knowledge are generally presumptuous, incredibly short-sighted, and misery would always be the inevitable fruit of their labour if not for the blinding influence of Folly and her servant Forgetfulness. In this manner Folly becomes a serious comic mouthpiece for Erasmus’ criticism of academics; but these are only two of her targets. The particular folly of which philosophers and theologians partake is more widespread and rooted in human nature – nobody escapes it. To presume to eliminate folly from one’s life is shown to be one of the most foolish endeavours there is. What other than folly resides in the pride behind the belief that one can liberate oneself from creaturely limitations and human fallenness? We cannot get outside ourselves to a folly free zone. Any effort to do so is to follow the pure utopian thinking that presumes we actually can step outside human nature to become objective, autonomous observers, capable of finding pure principles for right thought and action. Accepting our nature, we should learn to deal with uncertainty, ambiguity, and error as constant parts of our lives. Yet however deluded we may be, it is not impossible to discern truth or to act wisely. Indeed, there is no doubt on Folly’s or Erasmus’ part that there is such a thing as truth and a transcendent reality, a foundation for creation in the Creator

We need to accept and hold together – even to cherish – the two disparate halves of human nature. On the one hand, we are impoverished, deceitful, and self-deceiving. On the other hand, we are noble, capable of reasoning towards truth, capable of sharing the experience of it, and able to improve what we know and how we love. Emphasizing either aspect of human nature at the expense of the other is wrong and will yield distorted results. In reality they are always conjoined, and we live within the tensions both in the Gospel and the fallen human condition. Good, wise readings of ourselves, our history, and the Bible will only come forth if we push those tensions out front, cherish them, and live under them in humility, always seeking their truth. Here is no systematic, rationalistic method or theory that will help us without an intuitive, experience base and spiritually guided openness to questions and conversations where, if any truth is to be had, it must be tasted to be seen.
Praise of Folly ends thus -

‘If anything I’ve said seems rather impudent or garrulous, you must remember it’s Folly who’s been speaking. At the same time don’t forget the Greek Proverb, ‘Often a foolish man speaks words in season’…and its’ silly of you to suppose that I can remember what I’ve said when I’ve spouted such a hotchpotch of words. There’s an old saying, ‘I hate a fellow drinker with a memory’, and here’s a new one to put alongside it: ‘I hate an audience which won’t forget.’ And so I’ll say goodbye. Live well, and drink distinguished initiates of FOLLY’

Appreciate any thoughts here my distinguished fellow initiates :laughing:

Love

Dick

I always enjoy our brother D. composing a topic starter.
Sorry - that’s another thread.

Really Dick, you threw out quite a thought-starter there!
I suppose a number of us have read “The Name of the Rose” by Umberto Eco. (Spoiler Alert) That the mystery of the crimes turned on the supposed deleterious effects of, laughter (comedy, humor)- was a wonderful literary and philosophical stroke.
That it took place in a convent just helped make the point more…pointed.

Good post and a good reminder of a real and not-to-be-despised part of being human, and being Christian as well.

Yes Dave - ‘The Name of the Rose’; that all turns on the idea that the reasons for the murders I the monastery is because as monk has discovered a lost manuscript of the complete edition of Aristotle’s Poetics. Aristotle was looked upon as a great authority by the medieval Church after Aquinas. The Poetics that we have-Aristotle’s theory of literature - is incomplete. Perhaps Aristotle never completed it - but the version we do have looks at Epic poetry, Lyric poetry, and Tragedy only; it promises to look at Comedy but the manuscript breaks off. In Eco’s novel the discovery of the complete manuscripts of the Poetics puts faith in danger. Once we have a theory of laughter nothing will be sacred. Eco should read Erasmus - we have good cause for laughter in the service of faith and humility and of fair and loving togetherness as Fools for Christ.

Your in motely

Dick the devout servant of Dame Folly

I’ve just got Dave’s joke. D - composing (decomposing) a topic starter :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: Oh I’m slow on the uptake for a so called servant of Dame folly. The jokes on me boys and girls :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Yes the D for Dick, etc. My very exotic humor is wasted, just wasted :laughing:

In any case, your post on Folly has encouraged me to read the actual work. I’ve been slogging through “The Anatomy of Melancholy” and need something a little more…something.

ROFL :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Now that was good.

I’ve been talking with my cousin who’s quite horrified by my views on evolution, preterism, universalism, Christian agnosticism etc. He is still pushing the stuff that terrified me when I was 12, and oppressed me till I was 30. He believes there were dinosaurs on the ark, that Jesus is coming soon to burn the world etc. He’s also into climate denial, GM scares, crank medicine, Sarah Palin etc. (The whole thing comes as a package deal. Why is that?)

But here’s the interesting thing. Whatever he believes, he still gets up in the morning, has breakfast, goes to work (electrical engineer), weeds his garden. Whether he believes in alien abduction, fairies in the garden, dinosaurs in the ark, or whatever crazy thing, he still, almost certainly, manages to lead a successful, everyday life.

It seems we have one set of almost automatic behaviors that ensure we actually survive the real world, and another set mental pictures that can be, literally, as crazy as you like. So long as you don’t let the latter affect the former too greatly, you’ll survive. ie. Though we often lament it, our inability to put our beliefs into practice might be the only thing that’s keeping us alive!

Allan - you put that very well and it made me laugh too.
The only point I would make is the one Lewis made in Abolition of Man, that it’s what is between ‘survival mode’ in the gut and ‘pictures in the mind’ - in other words, trained sensibility, that really makes us human.

But I got your point and liked it. :smiley:

Beware all, Folly has opened her big mouth! :laughing: Really, I have no background on this subject, other than the few related verses in Proverbs. So beware, everyone.

I think anyone who is truly wise does not consider himself so. For instance, I sit next to a boy in my Art History class, and I still laugh to myself when I recall a conversation we had one day, right before taking an exam:

***Me **(with a stack of carefully studied flashcards): I hope I’m ready for this – there’s so many dates! I studied for forever, but I still don’t feel like I know anything.
**Boy: *I never study. You see, I’m very clever.

From then on, Mr. Clever, who had intimidated me during the first few weeks of school, struck me as a sorry character, very funny but with no idea why. I have not read Erasmus’ theory of knowledge, but would you say this is the sort of “wisdom” he mocks? And since knowledge is immeasurable, pursuing it and declaring ourselves wise will always result in disappointment, because we simply cannot “win” in that sense.

On the flip side, reveling in foolishness is very, well… foolish. If we didn’t considered ourselves “clever” to some degree, we’d be sitting around in puddles of our own drool, afraid and ultimately unable to try anything new.

I think a solution to this would be to admit that, in comparison to the vast amount of knowledge available, we know nothing and will always know nothing. Nonetheless, we have to continue learning as if we could become “wise.” As long as we never declare ourselves “wise,” we’ll be able to pursue wisdom without making a fool of ourselves.

It’s possible I’ve read this entire passage wrong, Dick. 99% of the time I have no idea what I’m talking about, but that’s never stopped me from spouting off before! :laughing:

Ha! T’is a mystery as profound as the origins of the universe. :laughing:

Very true!

Dave:

We have natural selection to thank for our automatic survival skills, and for the empathy that holds us together as a social species. Most atheists I know (and most Calvinists) are much nicer in person than their beliefs would have them be. It has survival value. People of strong will who shape their real lives to conform to their crazy beliefs tend to have less children!

Anyway, whenever I have long and frustrating conversations with people who hold crazy beliefs, I lose all confidence in the existence of true belief. I mean, why should your beliefs be crazy, but not mine?

I do know that feeling! :laughing:

Learned ignorance - Socrates is the model. ‘The more I know the more I know I don’t know’. ‘Know thyself’ says the oracle at Delphi - which means ‘know your limits’; and the oracle declares Socrates the only truly wise man of his age. It is wise for us to know our limits and live within them - it can be both humbling and liberating. So we have wise foolishness that knows its limits set up against the foolish wisdom of this world that does not know its own limits. Madman laughs at madman - but which one is really mad? This was Erasmus’ dilemma - the same dilemma played upon by Shakespeare’s fools both comic and tragic. And Erasmus identified this Socratic dilemma with the Foolish Wisdom recommended by St Paul - and Shakespeare’s fool in King Lear is both a disciple of Dame Folly and a Fool for Christ. And as William Blake wrote -

‘If as fool would persist in his folly, he would become wise’

‘Be not idle’ as good Doctor Burton says in the Anatomy of Melancholy - and be not a sour fool

And isn’t the mystery of life grand I say :laughing:

I am on a mission.
Dick - have you read a little book “Drinking with Calvin and Luther” that makes the claim that NOT drinking, not enjoying one of God’s gifts - is actually a sin, and makes the case by citing Luther (mainly - his peasants were well-lubricated) but also Calvin?

My mission - to name a book you haven’t read. This one is pretty obscure :smiley:

I haven’t read the book!!! :laughing:

But I do know regarding Luther…

He thought that Satan’s most devious trick was to tempt us not to enjoy the good things in life. At the Diet of Worms – where he was in danger of losing his life if he lost the debate – he sat sniffing a rose nonchalantly daring Stan to stop him enjoying it. He also would walk in his garden each morning daring Satan to try a stop him enjoying the flowers. And of course he liked a drink – very much so – and a scatological joke too (at Satan’s expense). And he took himself a nun as a wife to spite Satan (possibly one of the most ungentlemanly reasons for marrying ever given!!!) – and he spoke in very earthy terms about his enjoyment of sex.

Calvin hmmm – well I know he began an experiment of opening godly taverns in Geneva where bawdy songs were outlawed and morally improving songs were sung instead. They didn’t catch on apparently :laughing: !!! What else do you know about Calvin the good living soul? (I’d really like to sympathise with him as a human being more than I do at present)

I’ve not read everything by nay means – we just seem to have the same booklist to get through :laughing: !!!

Yours in learned ignorance

Dick :slight_smile:

That is SO like Stan… :wink:

I think m spelling slips are worth their weight in gold :laughing: The other day - speaking in heated debate - I addressed my antagonists accidentally as ‘bothers’. I should have left it at that - but I changed it to ‘brothers’ :laughing:

LOL

:laughing: Brilliant! “Work hard, and be a cheerful fool”. Such good advice. Since we’re fools whatever we do, we may as well be cheerful.

“Everything is meaningless,” says Solomon the Wise. “Who knows if the spirit of a man goes up, and the spirit of an animal goes down?”

I sure don’t.

Therefore, “there is nothing better for a man to do than to eat, drink and to enjoy his work all the days of his meaningless life.”

Is this 1 Allan 1:1?

Therefore, “there is nothing better for a man to do than to eat, drink and to enjoy his work all the days of his meaningless life.”

:wink:

I’ve always loved Ecclesiastes. :slight_smile: