Category: Notes

Unfortunately, this experience matches my experience in the critical theory class in grad school. Interesting ideas that entered and immediately exited my brain.

The ancients paid attention to how shall we live, but these modern philosophers were exploring the cutting edge esoteric problems of their discipline. The theories are stimulating, but it’s difficult to follow their intricacies in a cursory summary.

In all, good enough to figure out that it’s not worth pursuing further.

My philosophical interests are pedestrian. I lose interest once I see intellectual scaffolding under construction. I tried that hobby as a Calvinist teenager, but I’ve realized the beauty of Christianity is in the Beatitudes, not in its palaces of theology.

Same here for the philosophers. I should return to Greeks, their squabbles are much more enticing.

I came across the Crispin’s philosophy book last year when showing my dad all the cool things you could find on Libby, the Overdrive Library app.

It’s a quick listen as a 3 hour survey of Chinese philosophy from Confucius through the rise of the Neo-Confucianism, with sections on Daoism, Mohists, and Chan Buddhism.

As for substance, unfortunately my knowledge of Chinese philosophy is at the perfectly wrong point to judge the value of this book. I’ve read just enough that none of the info is new to me so I can’t attest if it would be difficult for a true beginner. But I’m not an expert to have an opinion on its accuracy, aside from attesting that the information was in line with I’ve read elsewhere.

The most notable aspect in the presentation was their use of voice actors with Asian accents when reading extended quotes. It was a little surprising at first but you get used to it quickly. It adds a variety to the proceedings.

䷒䷾

In my recent omnivorous push to gobble up reader digest summaries of the ancient philosophers, I came across Ching’s survey of Confucianism and Taoism.

Because the subject was about the broad religious traditions instead of the philosophers themselves, this book includes many comments from western observers over the centuries. It paints a richer picture of the thought and practice beyond the original conceptual ideals. (And yes, I enjoyed the mix of European and Asian accents in this presentation.)

It’s a great pairing with Crispin’s philosophy survey. I’m more drawn to the philosophical side of these traditions, but I enjoyed seeing how they have developed in history and society.

If you’re going to listen to one, I’d recommend that you listen to both.

At 1.5x speed it took less than an hour – a podcast length summary of one of the most influential thinkers in the past three millennia.

Having been on a Confucius kick for the past couple of years, I can’t say if it would be comprehensible for a pure first encounter with the sage, but the summary was inline with consensus opinion and my own impressions from reading the Analects.

The author takes a cheeky irreverent tone, which could be off putting but is in the spirit of such a quick summary. Such a tone might wear out its welcome, but again, this is third of the length of your typical Joe Rogan episode.

I’ve become a fan of Strathern’s “In 90 Minutes” series. Though short like a podcast, they have the benefit of a unified voice and have cleared a (minimal) bar for repeated publishing for profit.

As such, I suspect will make more efficient introductions to the various subjects over crawling the internet. They aren’t anything deep, but fill the niche of semi-intellectual breaks when the mind has tired of ponderous multi-hour tomes on tape.

Is “reader’s digest” an epithet?
It was for a teenager studying the koine New Testament Greek.

Now I got a full time job and two kids.
When do I have time to read the full text?
In the original language?

I don’t have the energy or days to catch them all, in depth.
Give me those reader’s digests!
And as audiobooks, I can learn while doing the dishes!

Paul Starthern’s “in 90 minutes” are cheeky accounts of the philosophers’ lives followed with short sections of collected quotes from their work.
Most of them run closer to 75 minutes, even shorter at 1.5x speed.

The summaries produced by Pat Childs are a bit longer.
They skip the wry humor, instead quoting extensively from the subject and commentaries.
These are fancy productions with famous narrators with other voices for the quotes (using ethnic accents based on each author’s origins).

I’ve dived into the ancient philosophers, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Confucius, Lao Tzu, St. Augustine, and Thomas Aquinas.

The pairing of two summaries in quick succession has worked well.
I don’t know enough to catch bias, much less discern what’s missing.
It’s better to avoid relying upon only one source.
And the repetition is a feature, so I better remember the highlights.
The two complementary perspectives provide a succinct survey on a subject.
A good base for choosing what next.

䷜䷇

But I’m not sure about the next steps.
Maybe continuing with their surveys of modern philosophers and writers,
Or diving deeper into these classics,
Or wandering into other survey series or lectures from The Great Courses.

Time (and Grizzlypear) will tell…

This movie came out sixty years after the original as CGI was eclipsing hand animation.

This program was a bit shorter than the original, but equally enjoyable.

I could nitpick that the ensemble of celebrity presenters were distracting and the CGI whales in one piece were distracting.

But the music was fine and the stories were strong.
And the program ended on the two powerful pieces.

The retelling of Noah’s Ark is a pure storytelling flex.
The animators know that you know the story.
Beat for beat, in half a minute you know exactly how it will unfold.
Even so, they create a piece to tug at your soul, using Donald and Daisy Duck!

The final animation was display of raw power, with the forest spirit who survives an volcanic calamity to regenerate the mountain.

Hopefully, they’ll come out with another Fantasia — before 2060.

䷗䷲

It’s a close call, but I prefer the original with its pure hand animation.
I suspect it’s because of a nostalgic preference for the novelty of the old.