“[Phaedrus] simply said that at the
cutting edge of time, before an object can be distinguished, there must be a
kind of nonintellectual awareness, which he called awareness of Quality.” (314)
To begin to look at the idea of Quality we must first be self-aware that it is
there. This period of self-awareness is very similar to that of judgment. It is
the moment where the person sees what is in front of them and determines how it
is, in shape, kind, and level of Quality. But the judgment that is made does
not take place in the objective; rather it is subject to the person who is the
viewer. Therefore Quality is different for everyone; every person is able to
take in the value or worth of something, but all take it in differently. These ‘value’s
and ‘worth’s are simply substitutes and placeholders for Quality. Quality is
the framework by which humans’ judge and relate. It is so central to how humans
are, however it is an entity that is simply known. That is what makes Quality
so vital to everyone; it is a ghost that is always with man, yet always just
out of reach.
So to look at Quality one must look at
everything else to determine the Quality that does exist. But here Phaedrus
comes across a dilemma, “does this undefined ‘quality’ of yours exist in the
things we observe? Or is it the subjective, existing only in the observer?”
(291) This creates a problem because Quality certainly is there, but if it is
objective it can be detected by instruments and if it is subjective then it
only lies within the observer and is essentially this “large pile of nonsense”
(Ibid). But Quality is the result of the interpretations one makes when
viewing, while Quality still lies within even if the interpretation have not
been made. So it appears that Quality does in fact exist in both forms, but the
opposite is true. Quality in fact does not exist in either case, it exists
between them, it is the midpoint between these two, and it creates a bridge in
this duality. Quality brings together the objective and subjective, the fact
and the opinion, it allows man to understand that though these two polar forms
of thought exist there is a way to understand both at the same time and that is
where Quality reveals itself.
This talk of duality is important
because Quality is important to this idea of two opposites. The
classic clash between Romantic and Classical Thought – the “Subject-Object
Duality” also exemplifies Quality’s role in all of this. Again Quality is in
fact the midpoint of this duality, therefore creating a three-pronged approach,
which in itself is no longer duality. First it is necessary to look at what
Romantic thought and what Classical thought are. In the novel John and Sylvia are
the representation of this Romantic thought. It is very similar to what one
might think based on the verbiage in that…
I like your approach to the topic, Zane, and I believe your points and use of quotes are strong. I do not know if we need to remain in third-person, but if it is the case, I would try to avoid using the words “we”, “our”, etc. The fact that you began your essay with the in-text definition of Quality is perfect, because it sets the focus of the essay right away. I also appreciate the definitive side you are taking in your essay without literally expressing it; I am going to assume that you are using the novel to explore the idea of Quality and to back it up as a valid philosophy. My only qualm is the structure of your writing; it is not poorly written, but I feel as though it flows less like research paper and more like a blog. In fact, to be blunt, it reminds me of the way the narrator speaks! Aside from that, I eagerly await your next post.
ReplyDelete