Harvard Insanity
Posted by Peter W. Schramm
I have shied away from this story for days well, because, believe it or not gentle reader, I thought it too obscene. But I now bring it to your attention because it has taken on Aristophonic dimensions. You will find "gendered violence", "phallocentricity," "artistic expression" and "feminist perspectives" galore. It is both amusing and too pathetic not to be read.
: include(/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in
: include(): Failed opening '/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/opt/sp/php7.2/lib/php') in
Mr. Schramm, I believe the spelling is Aristophanic. His name is Aristophanes. I am a doctoral student in Classics at UW-Madison. That is the only reason I am presuming to point this out. By the way, I do love the blog.
sm
One roomate asks what Jesus would do and the other speaks of "gendered violence".-Strange Bedfellows?
A few years ago the WWJD bracelets were quite popular...
1) there is a campaign against SUVs entitled "What would Jesus drive?
2)recently there was a debate on this blog on character of the Declaration, and President Bushs use of religion.
3) John Stuart Mill claims that the God of Christianity is Utilitarian.
4) John Locke writes on the reasonablenes of Christianity.
5) The World Council of Religions chooses inclusivity in allowing occult and new age groups prayer time.
6) The most interesting problem of the day is harmonising Islam to the west and democracy. War occurs partially for this end.
7) The Satanic Bible plagerizes Ayn Rand.
8) Flare up occurs over the question of wwmd? (what would Mohammed do?) at Beauty Contest in Nigeria.
9) Atheists refuse Satanic groups at march and conference.
10) In debate on War with Iraq an anti-war proffesor spends his speaking time decrying religious discourse in politics.
I suggest that Schoppenhauer was right when he said that "Intellect is invisible to the man who has none. In any attempt to criticise anothers work, the range of knowledge possessed by the critic is as essential a part of his verdict as the claims of the work itself...Vulgarity is in this respect like electricity; it is easily distributed."