Swift's attack on science 10/27

#10/27/11: When I was reading the third part of Gulliver's travels, I remember thinking to myself that Swift must have had some sort of beef with the scientific community for him to so unabashedly mock theoretical scientific pursuits by virtue of his exploration of Laputa. In Gulliver's travels to Laputa, and specifically their Laputan capital city, Lagado, there is an unmistakable mocking tone used to describe the pursuits with which the philosophers and scientists, high up in the academy at Lagado, undertake in the name of science. From the pursuit of finding a way to change feces back into food, to inventing machines with no real purpose, Swift lambasts the theoretical pursuit of knowledge in his brutal satire. Now, however, having read the entire work and coming to understand the political and social climate in which Swift wrote this book, it begins to make more sense why he undertakes this attack on theoretical and abstract science at this moment in the book. Swift, being a Torie, is a man (supposedly, at least) of the people. He is meant to represent populism and a rural community that has no interest in the abstract scientific findings coming about as a result of an upsurge in empiricism (led by men like Locke and Hume) that dominates the English philosophical and scientific community during this time. Swift forces the reader to make several connections by virtue of his writing, leading us to see that even though it is clear this abstract theoretical knowledge is just that--abstract and theoretical--its applications are concrete and tangible. For example, the people of Laputa do not allow right angles in their architecture because they are abhorred by the idea of practical geometry. This attack on practical science, albeit exaggerated, is most likely being aimed at institutions such as the Academy of Science, who Swift seems to suggest are concerned with taking meaningless "knowledge" and trying to apply it to practical situations, rather than undertaking practical and pragmatic pursuits. I would guess, without the knowledge that electricity would eventually power our entire world, Swift would have mocked Franklin for his experiments with electricity as theoretical and stupid. He also uses this obsession with theoretical and abstract sciences as a political statement, when he suggests that the King of Laputa is monopolizing and elevating this abstract, ultimately meaningless knowledge to suppress his own people, depriving them of sun and rain with the floating capital should the disobey. However, Swift inserts his own thoughts here, it seems, by suggesting that when a people are practical with their resources (the people of a particularly unruly town simply store enough food and water to wait out the king, and force him close enough to the city to capture him) they can destroy these seemingly untouchable, lofty dogmas (whether scientific or religious) through practical thinking and resolve.

The pragmatism of choosing a woman

#10/13/11: In his 1745 Work "Advice to a Young Man on the Choice of a Mistress" Benjamin Franklin once again shows off his humor, wit, and pragmatism in this letter, addressed to a "dear friend" in which he gives his advice on whom a young man, such as his friend, should choose for a mistress. Franklin begins, as any good man of God should, by advocating marriage as the true remedy of his friend's longings, and that only through marriage will he find true happiness. What struck me about this part of the letter is that, like almost EVERYTHING we read by Franklin, I had no idea if he was being sarcastic or not in his admonitions of the man for choosing to stray from a proper marriage. As we all know, Franklin was NOT the type of man to get married and stay settled, and in fact during his time in France he had more than one mistress of his own. I can see it both ways, because as a Quaker, I believe Franklin really does believe that marriage does bestow happiness. Unlike the pomp and circumstance of the Catholic Church or the Church of England, the Quaker conception of marriage was between two friends in love, and as such it seems the best option for the young man. However, I can also see this is a sort of "wink wink" to his interlocutor, essentially saying well look, here's what I'm SUPPOSED to tell you: Marriage! BUT now that I've got that out of the way, I'll just give you my advice SHOULD you choose to IGNORE my earlier advice...cough cough. I don't know, I can just see Ben doing something like that, winking at me off the face of a 100 Dollar bill...anyways moving on. I think Franklin's pragmatism is really funny and clever in this piece, and I think this piece is more about Franklin proving a point than really trying to convince the young man of anything. The way I read it, it seems that Franklin is saying "Hey look man, I told you you should find someone you love, and you can stand to be with for the rest of your life and just run with it, but if you're expecting me to tell you 'well if you wont do that, find the hottest sexiest chick in town and make your move' that's NOT what you'll be hearing." I think Franklin wants to prove that the conception of an ideal mistress as a young, beautiful, mysterious thing is stupid, and that if you're really dead-set on taking someone just for your physical pleasure, you might as well go with a more experienced broad who knows exactly what she's doing and is smart enough not to get attached. In fact, this is damn good advice for a guy coming out of a long term relationship after college or something like that, because it's true: If you're just looking for sex without all the emotional baggage, why would you look for someone who has no idea what they want or how to be a lover? I think this eternal pragmatism, and satire and humor are all facets of both Franklin and the Enlightenment literature we have studied this semester, and this one in particular gave me a few chuckles.