Walking down from Moffit Library, I notice a green leaf hanging from the tree. I think to myself is this leaf “green” because societal convention has called it green or is this even a leaf? Why is a leaf called a leaf? There is no writing on it saying “leaf.” I ask my color blind friend what color is the leaf. He answers, “It’s different for me.”Is his answer saying that society convention is wrong and his view is right or vice versa? Is his conceptual metaphor of the leaf concrete through his experience but abstract through the eyes of convention? Our experiences with this leaf can’t make us believe the notion that this is actually a leaf. Why not a branch or a twig, or simply something in the universe that has a texture and appears to have some kind of form. What makes us believe that this leaf is actually a leaf? Nietzsche attempts to answer this riddle with his own riddle. A riddle of Binaries. A Binary is two terms that are in opposition. Nietzsche explains that a metaphor which is usually considered by convention an abstract illusion of an idea, image, and text is actually the concrete, while the concrete concepts of convention are a fabricated generalization created by, “animals in the remote corner of the universe.” Nietzsche states that every word becomes a concept which in his view is a fabricated generalization: a copy cat of the original:
Let us think in particular of the formation of concepts. Every word
becomes a concept as soon as it is supposed to serve not merely as a
reminder of the unique, absolutely individualized original experience,
to which it owes its origin, but at the same time to fit countless,
more or less similar cases, which, strictly speaking, are never identical, and hence absolutely dissimilar
Do you believe that a metaphor is concrete and the concept is a fabricated generalization?
Do you believe a leaf is green or should be called a leaf?
I would love to hear what you (the class) have to say.
Thank You,
Sander Zaydman
I think it is very interesting that you brought up your colorblind friend, because it raises the question of how humans look at and relate to people who are, in a sense, incapable of perceiving the "truth." We seem to need to distinguish these people, for example as "colorblind," with a separate title, a separate word/metaphor. We seem to modify our idea of truth (and our language) to encapsulate these exceptions, maybe to be able to consider these people as the same, as humans. Perhaps I'm going a bit far.
ReplyDeleteHi Tew,
ReplyDeleteThank you for commenting on my post. I dont think you are going to far at all. I think you have a valid point when you say," We seem to need to distinguish these people, for example as "colorblind," with a separate title, a separate word/metaphor.
Thank You,
Sander Zaydman