3 ms·

I am reminded me of the tongue-in-cheek comments on the invention of writing made by Plato in the Phaedrus dialogue: "...but his great discovery was the use of

I am reminded me of the tongue-in-cheek comments on the invention of writing made by Plato in the Phaedrus dialogue: "...but his great discovery was the use of letters. .... for this discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners' souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves. The specific which you have discovered is an aid not to memory, but to reminiscence, and you give your disciples not truth, but only the semblance of truth; they will be hearers of many things and will have learned nothing; they will appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing"

wahern 9y ago
It might be worthwhile to consider interpreting that Phaedrus passage more literally. The thesis of Frances Yates' The Art of Memory is that you cannot properly understand ancient (or even more recent) scholarship without understanding memorization techniques. This is particularly true for Plato, for whom memorization arguably was the fundamental aspect of knowing. I found Yates persuasive on this point: you can't really understand Plato's concept of the forms, and of his epistemology in general, without understanding the role and function of memory palaces. She makes a similar argument about Augustine's conceptualization of God, though it's attenuated as by Augustine's time the use of memory palaces had already entered a millennium long decline. By the time of the Renaissance artists were using exaggerated methods of memory palace construction--i.e. anchoring and "hiding" ideas in complex, elaborate visual works--without fully understanding the origin of those methods. Renaissance artists recognized aspects of the technique in earlier works without fully understanding the context. The arc of Yates' book is analyzing this historical progression--how memory palaces transformed from a fundamental utilitarian methodology that strongly influenced epistemology to a fragmented and esoteric body of concepts before being almost entirely forgotten altogether. To understand how influential memory palaces might have been, consider how the technology of computers shapes our modern discussion about the mind and neurobiology. Even when our computer-mind analogies and metaphors are transparent, they still strongly influence how we generate and filter scientific ideas in both philosophy and biology. It can't be helped. Similarly, I found it very persuasive that Plato would naturally perceive and identify in the technology of memorization deeply intrinsic linkages between memorization, knowing, and reality.
- shanusmagnus 9y ago
  I came across a book years ago whose thesis was something along the lines that the construction of epic was the beginning of what amounted to a cognitive revolution in humankind; and that before Homer (and presumably as a function of abstraction and mnemonic techniques that underlay the construction and performance of his works, and them similar works) that people weren't yet fully conscious. I lost track of the name of the book, but it was a tantalizing argument even if it seems batshit, on the surface [1]. Anyway, your comment was a beautiful bit of serendipity -- I never would have heard of the Yates book otherwise, which I just ordered. Thanks for taking the time. [1] I could be absolutely butchering this, but the hypothesis was, if not literally as I've represented it, something similarly incredible in scope and spirit.
  - dri_ft 9y ago
    It's The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes.
    - shanusmagnus 9y ago
      Thank you!

wahern 9y ago

It might be worthwhile to consider interpreting that Phaedrus passage more literally. The thesis of Frances Yates' The Art of Memory is that you cannot properly understand ancient (or even more recent) scholarship without understanding memorization techniques. This is particularly true for Plato, for whom memorization arguably was the fundamental aspect of knowing. I found Yates persuasive on this point: you can't really understand Plato's concept of the forms, and of his epistemology in general, without understanding the role and function of memory palaces. She makes a similar argument about Augustine's conceptualization of God, though it's attenuated as by Augustine's time the use of memory palaces had already entered a millennium long decline. By the time of the Renaissance artists were using exaggerated methods of memory palace construction--i.e. anchoring and "hiding" ideas in complex, elaborate visual works--without fully understanding the origin of those methods. Renaissance artists recognized aspects of the technique in earlier works without fully understanding the context. The arc of Yates' book is analyzing this historical progression--how memory palaces transformed from a fundamental utilitarian methodology that strongly influenced epistemology to a fragmented and esoteric body of concepts before being almost entirely forgotten altogether. To understand how influential memory palaces might have been, consider how the technology of computers shapes our modern discussion about the mind and neurobiology. Even when our computer-mind analogies and metaphors are transparent, they still strongly influence how we generate and filter scientific ideas in both philosophy and biology. It can't be helped. Similarly, I found it very persuasive that Plato would naturally perceive and identify in the technology of memorization deeply intrinsic linkages between memorization, knowing, and reality.

shanusmagnus 9y ago
I came across a book years ago whose thesis was something along the lines that the construction of epic was the beginning of what amounted to a cognitive revolution in humankind; and that before Homer (and presumably as a function of abstraction and mnemonic techniques that underlay the construction and performance of his works, and them similar works) that people weren't yet fully conscious. I lost track of the name of the book, but it was a tantalizing argument even if it seems batshit, on the surface [1]. Anyway, your comment was a beautiful bit of serendipity -- I never would have heard of the Yates book otherwise, which I just ordered. Thanks for taking the time. [1] I could be absolutely butchering this, but the hypothesis was, if not literally as I've represented it, something similarly incredible in scope and spirit.
- dri_ft 9y ago
  It's The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes.
  - shanusmagnus 9y ago
    Thank you!