Henri Marrou and the dead horse
Marrou asks the same question I asked in the previous post regarding the dead horse:
'Every theory of knowledge that is conscious of its duties must integrate the fact of "intersubjectivity." (If need be, it will pose the "we" as the fundamental datum, and then call it undemonstrable.) But if must somehow account for it and prove that this fact, accepted by the common mentality, is not illusory.' (Marrou, p. 90)
The photograph of the dead horse, a historical document, is part of that 'we,' which is often shown undemonstrable, except when presented with images or documents of the past.
'History is not only concerned with whatever is specifically human in man's past.' (Marrou, p. 89)
What is not human is part of what is human, especially as it is experience through understanding historical documents.
'In order to understand a document (but more broadly, another person) this Other must pertain quite largely to the category of the Same.' (Marrou, p. 92)
Any why is the feeling moment, known as the painful moment of realization that things do exist, so important to the historical imagination?
'I must forget for a moment what I am, personally, and emerge out of myself in order to be open toward these others' (Marrou, p. 93)
But surely this openess is not just some weak state of giving in? There must be a noble, strong openess correct? The virtous historian is receptive to what is Other, but is not Other to himself, nor should be understand what is Other as anything other than what is the Same. And this is that undemonstrable moment of rejecting solipsism...
Need to return to this, yes at P. 94, also use it come formulate the big test, primarily the statement regarding the misunderstanding of the Other, [ouch, through some kind of realistic blood history of reading documents] and through Plato's Timmaus (and see below for more Plato, a cheeky egotistic posting) But really, to regard the importance of the role of the Other, not as other, but as the same and not as Other in the same at all, but a history according to sameness by virtousness of reception often in the form of the romantic gaze and leaving as a question the role or importance of a Logic or Ration, but defining real Ration not as a godless but as a Godful perspective expecting work and utility, again the taking the God out of Reason has led to poisonous exctractions in time [found in documents other than paper such as oil, petro-chemical, coal mines] remembering that the historical other is not only man, but the environment of man... and also remembering that it is not about what went wrong, but what went...
"The element of Sameness must necessarily prevail over Otherness in order to understand fully."
"Idyllness is not the ability to do nothing at all, but rather, it is the right to anything one wants"