On this date every year I promise myself that I would finally finish reading the book before the next anniversary comes around. After nine years of resolutions, I am at page 56. Here's to hoping this year will be the lucky year!
Veena: Chandrachoodan pointed me to this post and the other one about Nakheeran. In one of our prtracted conversations we touched upon both Joyce and logical fallacies. I'd written something very similar on my own Bloomsday post. My understanding of the Nakheeran 'controversy' was probably closer to your dad's. I did not know the context of the conflict between N. and Sivan, but I thought that Nakheeran represented what is only a conter to an Ad Hominem argument. "You might be Shiva, yes, I recognise that, but that does not absolve you of a logical fallacy in your writing". Since reading what you'd written, I suppose I have to revise my idea, yet, I am terribly uncomfortable with the idea that the god was right. I suppose that's the best part about myths that get trasnferred and moved out of context. Cheers
1 comment:
Veena: Chandrachoodan pointed me to this post and the other one about Nakheeran. In one of our prtracted conversations we touched upon both Joyce and logical fallacies. I'd written something very similar on my own Bloomsday post.
My understanding of the Nakheeran 'controversy' was probably closer to your dad's. I did not know the context of the conflict between N. and Sivan, but I thought that Nakheeran represented what is only a conter to an Ad Hominem argument. "You might be Shiva, yes, I recognise that, but that does not absolve you of a logical fallacy in your writing". Since reading what you'd written, I suppose I have to revise my idea, yet, I am terribly uncomfortable with the idea that the god was right. I suppose that's the best part about myths that get trasnferred and moved out of context. Cheers
Post a Comment