2011- 1- 22
|
#3807
|
|
أكـاديـمـي فـعّـال
|
رد: Third Year's Students Come Here To Be One Hand
compares poetry to philosophy and then he compares poetry to history. At the end, he shows superiority of poetry to history and philosophy.
He said that philosophy depends on giving abstract ideas, universal truth. It is difficult to understand. It needs highly educated people to understand it because it is always addressing the mind, the thinking, the philosophical analysis; whereas history does the opposite. It is only dealing with what happens actually in reality. These are concrete examples, what is really happening in life is written in history. These are incidents that actually happen. These are concrete examples.
So philosophy gives abstract ideas, whereas history gives concrete examples.
The aim of both is to teach, philosophy teaches morals and history teaches history.
Poetry makes use of both. It deals with the abstract ideas but it also gives them concrete examples. It makes use of what is found in philosophy and what is found in history. It does the same function. It teaches from abstract ideas and it teaches through concrete examples. But it is better than both as it delights.
It is better than history as it teaches morality, the ideals. It teaches better than history as in poetry we have poetic justice but in history, we do not have poetic justice. Sometime a tyrant in history is very successful and never punished. But it can never happen in a work of art. In poetry, a tyranny can never be prosperous. In reality, sometimes good people are not rewarded, they are sometimes punished for things they never go, but in poetry, this can never happen. So poetry is better, because it has poetic justice whereas in history, we do not always have justice. Justice is only found in poetry. This is why it is called poetic justice.
صبآآيا لو كتبت دي المقارنه مثلا لو جابتها لنا
تمام ولآ ناقصه 
|
|
|
|
|
|