Lyric № 33200
Epistemology (2nd draft)
Senses tell us much, but thinking tells us more
Like the Greek philosopher sitting on the floor
Contemplating issues such as morality
And if we know anything, and what those things might be
Think of the all-seeing fly glued onto the wall
Romancing time for peace of mind before his deadly fall
When he will question knowledge and what makes it so real
Such as the sorts of qualities of his every meal
He will wait for a future to fly to him so fast
It crashed and got itself buried in the distant past
He clears his mind and considers this thing we know as life
His meditations were severed by the Idealist knife
Cutting rational views its curious nature sought
To find the heart of all of our naturally innate thoughts
Science beat it there, now the real feud can begin
In the end of the fight, though, all of us will win
Despite the vicious lure of the coffin's hole
Rene Descartes fled with his immortal soul
Along the wooden path that boasts no real end
Just a vaguely dim request for us to pretend
While the external world runs past beyond our sight
Socrates left the shadows and then he found the light
Sadly for him, his arrogance showed through
He would not run from the State and so he paid his due
In the bitter cell from which he would not flee
The ghost of Christmas Nevermore popped round for a cup of hemlock tea
It's much too much, it's far too far, Pretence gave up and screamed
Yet your brains remain plugged in to the Great Machine
The Matrix some might call it, a name that seems quite odd
But not if Descartes proved the existance of God
Take a side, consider well, you can't sit on the fence
Because there is not such a thing as normal common sense
The choice is yours to face the truth here within your head
But do you at all believe a single word I said?
70 comments
So to your vote, what is fundamentally wrong with this? Yes it's a draft, but the main part of the content is fine as far as I can see. Stop bullshitting and give me some relevant reasons for your votes.
Anyway, you can't even prove that this poem exists.
1-How should I put the ideas from books into common experience?
and
2-Surely that would just make me sound like every other poet who considers themselves 'professional'. What good would that do me? I personally prefer to try something different.
And finally, yes it does bother me that you are going to keep giving my poems a zero just because it bothers me. You're supposed to be one of the proper poets on this site. You're not. A proper poet would give helpful advice and not try to ground young writers into the dirt. Get a better attitude, for chrissakes, the way you are right now benefits nobody.
It's a shame that you will repeatedly vote zeros, I don't vote zeros on yours because that would be unethical.
To poetandknowit, craigy is NOT bluffing knowledge, he really does know all this stuff, and very well he knows it too, along with myself and the stamp we can talk b*llocks for ages.
Are you seriously saying that there is nothing in here worthy of praise? If so, I would ask you to stop voting from the head and start voting from the heart-just because something doesn't conform to all the rules is no reason to instantly dismiss it. Did this poem not conjure up images in your head? I tried to write it that way so it would. If I failed, then either this needs to be reworked (it is only a draft, after all), or you have no imagination at all.
How many people here know anything about epistemology? It's fascinating, but confusing. It's exactly the same with this poem.
Is that a bad philosophy?
"Scarlet bubbles floating in the patterned air
Dancing their woven path without a single care"
this screams his age; one does not need to look at his profile to confirm it. as for what he was trying to do, well, this stepping stone is not so wobbly as some that i have broached, and my jeans are no stranger to cold, mucky waters.
keep at it ranger. listen to the ones who say you fail--they are the ones who will get your ire to where it needs to be to make yourself leaner, better, stronger.
as for this poem: you knew what you meant; say it with half the words; make ME, the reader, question its existence. k?
I've changed it a bit, does it work now? I don't really want to reduce it because it doesn't make sense when read, however if you or anyone else can see a way to shorten it, please let me know. (Please don't put 'Delete it all', that's just not original now, is it!)
my hole is quite comfortably furnished, thank you, and i have no intentions of dying in it just yet.
ranger? would you like me to comment on your revision?
mikius, you have a lot of balls speaking for someone else. i'm glad you like it the way it is NOW. did you see it before? how do you know which comments apply to which versions?
I have to question how 'experienced' poetandknowit is at writing poetry, because he never really seems to know how to criticise a poem-"It sounds like a 13-year old who's just ejaculated for the first time", what the fuck is he talking about? That doesn't help me in any way, shape or form. There are plenty of great poets on this site, but none will get the recognition they deserve because the 'big names' seem to just vote them out of contention. So much for the poemranker hierarchy.
Anyway, thanks for the help, if you have any more advice, please let me know.
loved it
#47 salutes you on yet another worthless rant on society the flock of sheep that calls itself sane HAHAHahahaha........
What is the meaning of the following sentence:
The shoehorn the parson's nose the pirate procured lubricated glistened. (3 marks)
(NB The sentence is grammatically correct)
Perhaps "TO shoehorn the parson's nose, the pirate procured lubricated...whatever". It shouldn't finish with a verb.
Maybe in your world, Dark Angel.
Checkmate, I believe.
And I was that shoehorn.
Good sir, I came onto this site to learn. You have obviously had what is known as a Classical Education. I have obviously not. Please accept my most Humble Apologies for doubting you, sir, I have been subjected to Excessive Stupidity in my lifetime. Will you aid me on the path to Poetic Enlightenment?
The Ranger the Riddle the Wise Man enweaved dumbfounded shall be slain.
"The parson's nose the pirate procured ate some honey."
Clearly, it is grammatically correct. Another way of putting it would be "The parson's nose, that was procured by the pirate, ate some honey".
Now consider
"The shoehorn the parson's nose the pirate procured lubricated glistened."
Another way of putting this would be "The shoehorn (that was lubricated by the parson's nose (which the pirate procured)) glistened."
So, a pirate procured a parson's nose, which in turn lubricated an shoehorn, which in turn glistened. Do you see?
In order to omit the subordinating conjunctions ("that" or the restrictive usage of "which, which is still acceptable usage, particularly in Europe), I believe the clauses must be restrictive. To be considered restrictive, those clauses must be essential to the meaning of the sentence. If you mean "The shoehorn that the parsons nose that the pirate procured lubricated glistened," you seem to be implying that there is more than one parson's nose and you specifically mean the one that the pirate procured and that there was more than one shoehorn and you specifically mean the one that the parson's nose lubricated. Is that the case? I'd like it better if you changed it to "The shoehorn the parson's nose, the pirate, procured lubricated glistened" but then we'd be back to procuring a lubricated shoehorn, which is against the law in any number of locales.
As for your reply, by the sentence
"The shoehorn the parson's nose the pirate procured lubricated glistened."
I mean that of all the parsons' noses, I am specifically talking about the one that was procured by the pirate. And of all the shoehorns, I specifically mean the one that was lubricated by the aforementioned parson's nose. Moreover, that shoehorn glistened. This is the only possible interpretation of the sentence that makes sense. It is grammatically correct. If you doubt me, Sir, then we shall duel! Or are you a coward?
Which helmet should I rub? The helmet the fireman wears. (equivalent to "the helmet that the fireman wears", not "the helmet, which the fireman wears".)
There is no parson. There is only his nose. And if you had read Gilded Stumps of Olde, you would know perfectly well who the pirate was.
The first line is half good, the first half. try to come up with a more interestng way of saying the rest.
Is it important for the Greek to be sitting? If not just say the Greek..
Contemplating-- morality... Why do you put 'issues such as' in there? These are the things you need to eliminate, these terrible unnecessaries. They work for creating a character's personality, but since this is you talking, and your subject is complicated enough as it is, not to mention you're writing poetry, brevity is your friend.
...and what makes it do real...
...such as the sorts of...
...onto-should be 'to'...
...and what makes it so real(how about and it's reality')...
Oh well got to go libraries closing. I'll get back to it later tonight. The point is you are learning to crawl, and that's ok. Pay attention to those writers you admire, copy their style for a while, your's will emerge.
Anyway, thanks for your help-hope to hear from you a bit later-and I'll submit this other one that I'd like you to read.
Romancing time for peace of mind before his deadly fall
to him so fast
It crashed and got itself buried in the distant past
He clears his mind and considers this
Despite the vicious lure of the coffin's hole
Rene Descartes fled with his immortal soul
Sadly for him, his arrogance showed through
He would not run from the State(,) so he paid his due
In the bitter cell from which he would not flee
The ghost of Christmas Nevermore popped round/
for a cup of hemlock tea
It's much too much, it's far too far, Pretence gave up and screamed
Take a side, consider well, you can't sit on the fence
Because there(')s no(t) such a thing as normal common sense
The choice is yours to face the truth/ here within your head
But do you at all believe/ a single word I said?
Log in to add a comment.