Erasmus'un "ahmaklık"ın ağzından bizlere sunduğu tamamı hiciv olan eseri "Deliliğe Övgü / The Praise of Folly", ünlü yazarın Cicero'nun meşhur sözü "İnsanların çoğu ahmaktır"ı esas alarak tüm insanlığı zekice bir şekilde eleştirdiği gerçekten oldukça özgün bir eser. Özellikle son çeyreğinde başladığı İncil ve din eleştirisiyle zamanının çok ötesinde bir kitap olan "Deliliğe Övgü", kendine has diliyle alışması başta zor ama okudukça değer kazanan bir yapıt. Dini kullananları oldukça ağır bir şekilde eleştiren Erasmus'un tarihten ve İncil'den verdiği örnekler epey yerinde. Kısaca, "kutsal kitaplarda bile insanların ahmak olduğunun savunulduğu bu dünyada nasıl bilgeliğin güzel bir şey olduğunu savunursunuz" diyen Erasmus'un sanki bir tiyatro sahnesini andıran yergili diline hayran kalmamak elde değil. Okunması gereken felsefe eserlerinden biri olmakla beraber okumadan önce Antik Yunan (Platon, Aristoteles) ve Roma (Cicero, Marcus Aurelius) felsefesinin önemli örneklerini okumakta fayda var.

01.11.2016
İstanbul, Türkiye

Alp Turgut

http://www.filmdoktoru.com/kitap-labo...

... Eramus's reflections on human actions, decisions, placed in a bit of a humurous light ...

Erasmus, the "Wise Fool"?

"In Praise of Folly" is, to me, a tale of foolishness and whimsy, that celebrates the power of absurdity and irrationality, dedicated to the immense genius of Sir Thomas More.

Moria!
No, not the dwarves' mine in Tolkien's epic, but the Greek word that means "folly", can refer to, among others, two things:
Lack of wisdom, good sense or judgment, foolishness, stupidity, etc. It's also used to refer to an extravagant building; A decorative one often found in gardens, built primarily for aesthetics rather than practical use. The word has so many attributed meanings that when I researched a little I got lost.
If we ignore the architectural association and concentrate on its psychological meaning, folly is essentially the antithesis of wisdom. It represents a significant lapse in judgment, often leading to actions or decisions with negative consequences. This lack of foresight or understanding can stem from various factors, including ignorance, impulsivity, arrogance, emotional distress, and so on; basically, human folly is endless.

This makes me think that perhaps Erasmus in giving this title to this small philosophical speculation doubted his own wisdom in writing it. Doing so, at his time, he engaged himself in a seriously hazardous business.
In a time of schism between the most powerful organization of his time, the Roman-Catholic church and the branch of Christianity that became known as Protestantism opposing the Pope to those who refused his authority, led by Luther and Calvin, to write a text condemning all members of the clergy, and putting in cause the fundamental beliefs that only the priesthood and the Bible were the sole infallible source of authority, was a very risky business, even if announced as a satire, almost a practical joke.
How much (even if...) this essay reflects and reinforces, with humour, the "Ninety-five Theses" of Luther that sparked Protestantism as an organized movement, I can't say because I'm not familiar with the document and, besides, I'm a too low "worm" to pretend understand the diatribes of moral theologists.

Erasmus wrote the text in the first person, portraying "Folly" as a wise and witty goddess, personified to convey his thesis about the necessity of some amount of idiocy in human life. I couldn't agree more, and More would agree with me, I believe.
In a very modern-day satire with a religious twist, Erasmus mocks beliefs, religious hypocrisy, and societal flaws, using humour to highlight the absurdity of certain practices or doctrines.
Towards the end, the text disputably shifts to advocate for a more genuine or spiritual interpretation of the catholic religion, suggesting that while an organized religion may be flawed, the underlying principles can still be valuable. It rests to be proven.
But the criticism of human behaviour, with its insatiable greed, vanity, and deep fears is present to expose the absurdity of human nature and even "Existence".
I found the text heavily psychological in its analysis and a thought-provoking exploration of the nature of belief, faith, and doubt.
If Erasmus considered himself one of the morosophoï (one who holds knowledge, but does not denigrate madness in favour of reason) or not, I can't say, but his refutation of counterarguments, disputing the idea that madness is bad makes him look like one, to me.

Throughout the centuries this text has been pointed out as very complex and hard to interpret and is frequently used as an example of what a discourse to defend an idea should be. I think I should pity all future philosophers and theologists! Poor creatures. And I thought that Nietzche was hard...

Our brains, frequently, rely on biases and heuristics, two other words to define Erasmus' folly, to make quick decisions and assumptions. However, these shortcuts can sometimes lead us astray. Using the "rule of thumb" to make decisions quickly and efficiently seems often helpful in navigating complex situations, but it can also lead to systematic errors in judgment. Think about the decisions made by our politicians and their practical results. Given the state of the World today, I wonder if our auto-proclaimed highly smart leaders aren't following, too much to the letter, the words of Erasmus' goddess, "Folly".

Why Erasmus defends that folly should rule our lives? Because, in his opinion, if people saw the world as it really is, they would neither love themselves nor one another; thankfully, however, folly gives us the gift of delusion, allowing us to find some kind of happiness and social connection and not feel lonely.
To sum up: wasting time and effort coming up with highly complex ideas about Life and God does not help our fellow human beings in any way. Therefore, it is better to remain an ordinary common "small" brain, than be a smart theologian or philosopher who does not help anyone.

The world is a stage and life a game of sound and fury represented by a madMan.

Renaissance Recommended Reading List as per Benjamin McEvoy in How to Get an Oxford English Education for free: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1Q2J...

In general, I like to think that there is progress in the arts- that geniuses of a later age are likely to be broader and more engaging than geniuses of an earlier age because they have the example of earlier men and women from which to learn. Lately I've been having a hard time holding onto this belief; that I've finally got around to reading Praise of Folly has made it harder still. Erasmus combines a mildly annoying love of classical literature with an amazing ability to wield irony and social satire. Where are the men and women with this ability today, I ask? Maybe they're all off writing 'deep,' 'profound' novels about the terrifying depths of the human condition or some shit.

On the other hand, PoF has also given me a way to hold onto my knee-jerk modernist/progressive tendencies, because while novelists today are forced, by economics, MFA programs and low expectations, to write guff, Erasmus' audience was Thomas More. The problem, I now see, is not that literature isn't progressing; it's that the readership of literature is regressing. Conveniently, since I teach literature, this gives me a full heart and clear eyes: *I* must *force* the world's readers to advance so that they can once again/for the first time read books this hilariously coruscating and intelligent. To the barricades, Komrad!

In that spirit, I recommend this book to anyone who wants to get better at being a person; just trying to keep track of what Erasmus 'really' means (so Erasmus writes foolishly about the foolishness of St Paul, who advises foolishness...) will raise your intelligence; if you succeed, you're a better woman than I.

As for this edition- I think the annotator makes a bit too much of the 'difficulties' involved in distinguishing between Folly's 'unironic' praise of simple Chrisianity, and her ironic praise of intricate theology. The difference is quite clear: the former *know* that and how they are foolish, and in so doing become genuinely wise; the latter don't know how stupid they're being, and so for all their knowledge, are truly fools. Also, what sort of a world do we live in that needs to annotate Folly's hatred of merchants with "For Erasmus the greed and self-interest of merchants was socially counter-productive." For *everyone* except a few nutbag Randians the greed and self-interest of merchants is socially counter-productive. Mercantile activity might not be bad in itself; greedy and self-interested mercantile activity not only harms people, but, (horror of horrors!!!) distorts the market.

*********************************

"Nothing is so trivial as treating serious subjects in a trivial manner; and similarly, nothing is more entertaining than treating trivialities in such a way as to make it clear that you are doing anything but trifle with them." (6-7)

"The old man loves his old woman as the boy loves his girl. This happens everywhere and meets with smiles, but nevertheless it's the sort of absurdity which is the binding force in society." (34)

"What was it which recalled the Roman mob to harmony in teh state when it was plotting violence - a philosopher's speech? Not a bit of it. It was a silly, childish fable made up about hte belly and other parts of the body." (40)

"It's a true sign of prudence... to be willing to overlook things along with the rest of the world." (45)

"What's the harm in the whole audience hissing you if you clap yourself?" (49)

"Among all the votive offerings you see covering the walls of certain churches... have you ever seen one put up for an escape from folly or for the slightest gain in wisdom?" (65)

"The saint will protect you if you try to imitate his life." (66)

"They're quite wrong if they think man's happiness depends on actual facts; it depends on his opinions... real facts often take a lot of trouble to acquire... an opinion, on the other hand, is very easily formed, and it is equally conducive to happiness, or even more so." (70-1)

"The funniest thing of all is when there's an exchange of compliments and appreciation, a mutual back-scratching." (79)

"They insist that it detracts from the grandeur of sacred writing if they're obliged to obey the rules of grammar. It seems a most peculiar prerogative of theologians, to be the only people permitted to speak ungrammatically; however, they share this privilege with a lot of working men." (95)

"Picture the prince, such as some of them are today: a man ignorant of the law, well nigh an enemy to his people's advantage while intent on his personal convenience, a dedicated voluptuary, a hater of learning, freedom and truth, without a thought for the interest of his country, and measuring everything in terms of his own profit and desires." (105)

"As the wise man despises money, it takes good care to keep out of his way." (114)

"I'm a man who despises no one but himself and wants nothing so much as to be at peace with the world." (162)

In Praise of Brexit

Folly speaks:

About five hundred years ago, a man named Erasmus decided to publish a book praising me. Unbelievably, no one had this idea before, and none since. Nobody has the time or the inclination—nobody besides Erasmus, that is—to sing my praises, apparently. All the other gods get their encomiums, but not me.

Well, perhaps I should take the neglect as a compliment. After all, isn’t it the height of folly not to acknowledge the role that folly plays in human life? So is not the neglect a kind of compliment, albeit backhanded?

Nevertheless, some folks need some reminding, it seems, especially after what happened the other day. Oh, you know what I’m talking about: the United Kingdom’s vote to leave the European Union. All I’m hearing left and right is how stupid, short-sighted, narrow-minded, and above all foolish it was to vote “leave.” Well, I can’t stand my name being dragged around in the dust any longer, so I’m taking this opportunity to peep up and remind you how much you owe me.

First, let’s follow in Erasmus’s footsteps and take a short trip around Europe. As you might already know, Erasmus may justly be called the first true “European,” since he was such a cosmopolitan fellow and traveled everywhere. Even now, the trans-European student-exchange program is named after Erasmus. You might already know that the most popular destination for the Erasmus program is sunny Spain, where lots of young Britons like to go and get a tan. (Guess they won't be coming anymore!)

Spain’s a lot different now from when Erasmus was alive. Back then, the Inquisition was in full swing and anybody who wanted to hold public office had to prove his “purity of blood,” which meant he didn’t have any Jewish or Muslims ancestors. Nowadays we don’t see that kind of behavior anymore in Spain; the Spaniards decided that it wasn’t such a good idea. But the folks in England apparently disagree: one UKIP candidate, Robert Blay, got suspended after saying his rival “isn’t British enough.” You see, my foolish devotees never disappear, but only migrate!

Yes indeed, Spain is truly different now. Let’s go to the Mediterranean coast to take a closer look. It's a veritable mini-England! We can find British pubs, British radio broadcasts, British supermarkets selling British products. We can see retired old Brits eating baked beans and drinking tea as they take in the southern sun. And we can meet some Brits who have lived here for over a decade, and who still can’t speak a word of Spanish! Yes, and between two pints these same Brits can tell you about how terrible is the EU and how there are too many immigrants in England. Oh, my wonderful followers!

As you might recall, it was around the time Erasmus wrote this book that England decided to leave another international organization: the Catholic Church. And the reasons were, I suppose, similar enough: “We don’t want some Italian Pope telling our king which wife he can or can’t behead!” Thomas More, one of Erasmus’s friends, and to whom this book is dedicated, disagreed with this, and he got beheaded along with the wives. Lots of people didn’t like this, but honestly I can’t say it was such a bad move. Executions are decisive, at least. Some people still agree with this strategy, like the guy who killed the politician Jo Cox. It worked for Henry VIII, so it can work for us!

Let’s fast forward a bit in time, to the glorious British Empire. By Jingo, it was big! It stretched across the whole world! Look at how these colonial officers stroll around Mumbai, Nairobi, Hong Kong, Sydney! You’ve got to admire them. They don’t ask anybody’s permission to go anywhere, they just walk right in with their guns and biscuits. Doesn’t take long to subdue the native population when you’ve got the Royal Navy on your side! Sure, this approach didn’t please everybody. But, hey, it was the high point of British history. Nowadays, they’re a bit more worried about foreign immigrants colonizing them than the reverse.

Now you see what a big role I’ve played throughout history. You see how many decisions and opinions I’ve inspired! Oh, but now I hear some people saying that the world would be better off without me. Sure, Folly is important, they say, but that doesn’t mean Folly is worth praising. Fair enough, I suppose. Yes, maybe I do cause a bit of mayhem in the world. And yes, maybe I take things too far. But consider this: For every bad decision I inspire, I also provide the remedy.

For without Folly, do you think people could overcome the sheer hypocrisy necessary for their decisions? Without me, do you think people could congratulate themselves for shooting their own foot? Without my soothing balm, do you think people could go to bed with a clean conscience after doing harm to the world? Do you think British people could simultaneously praise the heroic strength of their culture while worrying that a few thousand immigrants could totally destroy their way of life?

No! Of course not! And since happiness is the goal of life, and happiness is most easily achieved through folly, I think that, despite whatever decision I inspire, I still deserve a lot of praise.

So long live Erasmus! Long live Folly! And long live Little England!

Eser "delilik"in ağzından deliliğin tarifi ile başlar. Onu bir varlığa çevirir ve soyağacıyla aile halkını sayarak kendini tanıtır. İnsan ve mitolojik tanrılar evrenlerinde bunların meydana gelmesindeki başat rolünü hatırlatır. Devamında yeryüzüne iner ve insanın varoluşunun ve mutlu olmasının tek sağlayıcısı olduğunu örneklemeye girişir. Bunun için karşıtı olarak gördüğü aklı ve bilgeliği aşağılamaya girişir. İnsanın yalnızca varoluşunun değil, mutluluğunun da kaynağı olduğunu ise zevklerle bağdaştırır. Yemek yeme, dost sohbeti, karıkoca ilişkileri... hepsinin zevkli tarafının deliliğin özellikleri ile ancak ortaya çıkabileceğini anlatır da anlatır. Bu özelliklerin en önemlisi de karşılıklı kandırmacalardır deliliğin kendisine göre.

Devamla yine bilgelik ve deliliği karşılaştırırken Sokrates'in ve umum filozofun dünya işlerindeki başarısızlıklarından dem vurur. Bunu Platonun filozof kral önermesine bağlar ve Marcus Aurelius örneğinden bu önermeyi eleştirir. Marcus Aurelius'un başarılı bir imparator olmasının yanı sıra bu başarının oğlunu yetiştirememesi ve devleti ona emanet etmesi yanında lafı bile olmayacağını söyler. Tabi burada bir tutarlılık veya haklılık iddiası ısrarı yok. Keyifli bir anlatım için belli örnekler cımbızlanmış.

Bilim ve sanatın varlığı da deliliğe bağlanır. Bunları üretmenin motivasyonu şan ve şeref susuzluğu olarak gösterilir ki özsaygı; deliliğin cariyelerinden biridir. Deliliğin en üstün hali olarak nitelendirir çünkü hayatın başlıca hoşlukları dışında, bilim ve sanat başkalarının deliliklerinden zevk almayı mümkün kılar

Delilik daha sonra aslında ihtiyatlılık konusunda da bilgelikten üstün olduğunu söyleyerek yeni bir bahis açar. Bunu pervasızlığı ile temellendirir. İnsanın eşyayı anlaması önündeki iki büyük engel olan korku ve utanmanın delilikte barınmayacağını, bu bağlamda kendisinin zararına olarak bilgelikten de bilge olduğunu; bu bilgeliğin ise eşyanın bilgisiyle neye karşı ihtiyatlı olması gerektiği bilgisini de içerdiğini söyler. Münazır lafazanlığı. “Madem ki insanız, gerçek ihtiyatlılık, yapımızın kaldırdığından daha fazla bilge olmamaktan ibarettir.”

Bilim ve sanat konusunda deliliğin önde olduğunu savunduğu pasajdan sonra, bu sefer bilim ve sanatı yermeye girişir delilik. Bilim ve sanatın doğadan ayrılmak olduğunu, yaratıcının bütün canlıları mutluluk ve yeterlilikle teçhiz ettiğini, bilge insanın ise bilim ve sanat peşine düşerek bu doğallıktan uzaklaştığını, böylelikle mutluluktan ve doğrudan da uzaklaştığını anlatarak; cehaleti, gafleti velhasıl deliliği över. Burada elbette bir metin içi çelişki var fakat amaç zaten tutarlılıktan ziyade retorik kabiliyet. Doğaya dayanma safsatası da ayrıca mevcut tabi.

İleriki pasajlarda deliliğin kendisindense bizzat deliler üzerinden mesele işlenir. Delilerin kadınlara, sultanlara krallara çekici gelmesinden; bilgeliğin yalan söyleme yeteneği yanında delilerin yalnızca doğruyu söyleyebildiğinden bahsedilir. Delilere ceza verilmemesinden, onların bu dünyada acı elem ve üzüntü çekmediğinden, öbür dünyada da doğrudan cennete gittiklerinden bahsedilir. Kişi olarak bahsettiği deliler arasında, kulağa inanılmaz gelen hikayeler anlatan rahipler ve dinleyicilerini sayar. Delilik eylemleri olarak freskler önünde dua etme, papalıktan alınan bağışlanma belgeleri gibi tenkitler var. Burada bu deliliğin yalnızca keyif için değil “tencereleri kaynamasını” sağladığını belirttiğinden bir tür ve tariz de mevcut.

Deli sınıfları arasında din adamları ve gafil takipçileri dışında; deliliğin özsaygı cariyesinin meftunları anlatılır. Bu özsaygı aslında kibirden başka bir şey değil. Bireylerin sırf belli bir soya sahip olmakla, belli bir yerde yaşamakla velhasıl kimlikleriyle övünme delilikleri; sanatçıların doldukça alçakgönüllü olmalarına karşın bütün yeteneksizlikleri ile kibirle dolu olmaları delilikle bağdaştırılıp eleştirilir. Kitabın bu bölümleri güldürüden uzaklaşıp ciddileşmektedir.

Dil bilgisi ile uğraşanlara ettiği hakaretler çok komikti. Günümüzdeki şu sosyal medyada dolaşan tdk zabitlerini hatırlattı. Bir alıntı: “aralarından biri bir dilbilgisi yanlışı kaçırsın, bir başkası da farkına varsın, işitiniz artık gürültüleri kavgaları, hakaretleri, sövmeleri!” Dilbilimcilerin akabinde, şairler filozoflar diyerek tenkit pınarı akıp gider bunların için hukukçularla ilgili olan iki paragraflık pasaj -elbette mesleğim olduğu için- harikulade idi. Bu bölümün en hacimli kısmını din adamlarına, teologlara, rahiplere ve keşişlere yönelik sözleri oluşturuyor. Reform öncesi Avrupa’nın din yaşantısına eleştiriler getirmekte. Keşişlerin yozlaşmış dinle ilintili olmayan düşük hayatları, vaizlerin halkı kandırmak ve manipüle etmek üzerine kurulu öğrenilmiş metodları, teologların anlamsız tartışmaları... Delilik temasından nerdeyse koparak piskoposların, kardinallerin ve hatta papanın bizzat kendisinin; krallar ve hükümdarların sıfatlarına mündemiç esas görevlerinden ne suretle koparak hırsızlığın, zevkin, sefanın, dindışılığın ve haksızlığın odağı haline geldikleri, çarpıcı şekilde kitaba konu edildi. Bu noktada hırsla yazıldığı belli, hatırlanmaya değer cümleler var.

Kitabın son bölümleri zamanıyla ilgili birtakım teolojik tartışmalara hasredilmiş. Günümüze hitap eden bir tarafı olduğunu söyleyemeyeceğim.

I would have liked it more if it had been half its length. It's funny and caustic at times, but it's stretched out too much, too often.
And even though the notes in the back help, it's a shame we miss 99% of the inside jokes, but I suppose that can't be helped.

Een schitterend boek. Het relativeert wat een mens is, van de priester tot de artiest. Het is makkelijk leesbaar en niet te lang. Waar Erasmus in het begin in het algemeen de zotheid aanprijst, gaat hij langzaam maar zeker allerlei typen mensen af die in zijn ogen zich te serieus nemen. Uiteindelijk komt hij bij de theologen en schoffelt hij hun ingewikkelde dogma’s onderuit met verwijzingen naar de Bijbel. Aanrader om het te lezen, het helpt je om jezelf een stuk minder serieus te nemen.

m'ha agradat i estic contenta d fer una carrera tan xula com la nostra q ens acompanya en el procés d'entendre i fins i tot apreciar les idees d'uns senyorots que ens queden tan lluny (ideològicament i en el temps)

Wat een geweldig boek was dit.

I was looking for a notable work of the Renaissance, and came across this one, published in 1508. Written (via translation) in an older prose style, it requires the reader’s close attention. It takes the form of an essay, narrated by Folly herself, who praises her own virtues. Folly is a foil for Wisdom, and this is clearly a work of satire. It is an early example of social commentary, intended to mock human foibles. I found it interesting that many of the foibles are the same ones we see today such as vanity, greed, and ignorance, and especially the pursuit of power and glory. Society has changed greatly since the 1500s, but human nature is much the same. The work targets scholars, theologians, monks, and the clergy, pointing out pretensions and hypocrisies. I like reading these historical literary classics from time to time. It sheds light on the philosophies of the Renaissance. It can bog down in places, but still worth the time.