John Keats wrote in a 21 December 1817 letter to his brothers: “I mean Negative Capability, that is when man is capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts without any irritable reaching after fact & reason.”
Wikipedia tell us [here] that "Keats believed that great people (especially poets, whom he considered to almost be on another level to the rest of humanity) had the ability to accept that not every thing can be resolved - being capable of remaining negative on something. Keats was a Romantic and believed that truth does not lie in science and philosophical reasoning, but in art. In art the aim is not, as in science, to solve problems, but rather to explore them. Hence, accepting that there may not be a solution to vexing problems is important to artists."
That suggests that Keats wouldn't have thought much of lawyers and judges, for a solution - sometimes any solution - is often more important than the process (Keat's adventure). On the other hand, I don't remember ever reading anything setting out Keats' view of the placement of the legal profession in the corpus of humanity. (That is, lawyers who are not also poets.) I suppose I should have looked on the bottom of that urn. Still, most people would concede that lawyers and judges are "capable of being in uncertainties ... without any irritable reaching after fact & reason" - actually, without any irritation at all - and holding (and expressing) contradictory opinions. If you don't, I suggest you listen. And then read a few case reports.
In the meantime, I'll read an Ode or two. Or the Sunday comics.
That suggests that Keats wouldn't have thought much of lawyers and judges, for a solution - sometimes any solution - is often more important than the process (Keat's adventure). On the other hand, I don't remember ever reading anything setting out Keats' view of the placement of the legal profession in the corpus of humanity. (That is, lawyers who are not also poets.) I suppose I should have looked on the bottom of that urn. Still, most people would concede that lawyers and judges are "capable of being in uncertainties ... without any irritable reaching after fact & reason" - actually, without any irritation at all - and holding (and expressing) contradictory opinions. If you don't, I suggest you listen. And then read a few case reports.
In the meantime, I'll read an Ode or two. Or the Sunday comics.
No comments:
Post a Comment