cher@ihlpf.UUCP (Mike Cherepov) (10/15/86)
This, I hope, will clarify the disagreements between me and Jan Wasilewski on whether poetry has much similarity to philosophy. As a matter of fact, I think I've reduced these disagreements to atomic and indivisible (ok, ok, in my mind, at least). Anybody cares? I see the distinction as that between form and substance. Poetry is a form of communicating on about any topic (along with prose, sign languages, etc). Philosophy is a set of (related?) topics communicated, regardless of form. I do not like the idea of comparing form and substance in this manner. About the only justification for that could be that poetry (a form) is conducive to speaking on philosophical topics, which Jan has said, maybe not in so many words. My problem with that is that: 1) poetry is just as good or better for speaking on anything else. 2) prose historically has been better then poetry for speaking on philosophical matters (much more widely used). Er, of course, "form" and "substance" can be just as vulnerable as "truth" & "beauty". Say "form=substance" and you have opened a whole new can of worms. Mike Cherepov