Class Summary 3/25

We began Friday's class with a brief discussion of the movie, Agora. The movie was about the female philosopher, Hypatia, who, in the end of the movie, is stoned to death. We first talked about how many historians dispute the way in which Hypatia was killed, because there are some who say that she was stoned to death, but others believe that she was flayed alive with pieces of either glass or pottery. Regardless, the movie depicted Davis, her slave, as one who first suffocated Hypatia before her stoning so that she would not have to endure the pain of a death of that nature. We also discussed that the library in the movie was not the great library of Alexandria, as the movie tells us. Dr. Layne, along with numerous other class mates, felt as though the sieging of the library was one of the most emotional scenes in the movie. As Jennifer stated, it is so sad to see that many human achievements up until that point in time were destroyed with the seizing of the library.

What, exactly, was the film about? Many of our classmates thought that the film was about the historical battle between faith and reason. In the film, Hypatia is accused of being godless, or believing in nothing, and many believe Hypatia to be a witch of sorts. It is arguable, though, whether or not that is true. Hypatia did, after all, have much faith in philosophy, as she stated at one point in time. For her, however, one should not adhere to the dogmatic beliefs of a religion. Hypatia told one of the bishops in the film, "You can't question what you believe, I have to question what I believe." Additionally, it could be said that there is some sort of faith-like quality to science, as Dr. Layne pointed out. It is inaccurate to say that in hypothesizing, one is not basing his or her claim on faith. Hypatia even told Davis at one point that she knew she could prove him wrong, but she did not know how she was going to do it. In that statement, it is evident that Hypatia did, in fact, have some sort of faith which preceded here scientifically backed claims to knowledge.

After our discussion of the movie, we continued to read "Philosophies for Sale." We encountered a Heraclitian, a Demacritian, a Platonist, and a Stoic. The Heraclitian and Demacritian were on sale together, and the literary juxtaposition of these two was quite humorous. On one hand, there was the Demacritian, an atomist, who believed that all things were relative, so he was constantly laughing at everyone around him. On the other hand, there was the Heraclitian, who believed that all was in constant flux and that fate was indifferent to us. Because the Heraclitian believed that all were deaf to the eternal cycle, he was weeping. After the two of them, we saw a Platonist for sale. Lucian mocked Plato's "Republic" with a discussion of the possession of wives, and we talked about how many misconstrue the purpose of the "Republic" to be a political guide, when it is not. Finally, we encountered the sale of a Stoic, and, here, we could see a mockery of stoic logic and the assent to knowledge with the example of the veiled figure.