This was a very cogent review, and that final quote was spot on. I have tried to read In Praise of Folly in the past, but never stuck with it, I will give it another try due to your review. Thanks.
Thank you. Like I said, I really liked the first half or so, then I got bogged down near the end and just pushed through till I finished it. Its possible that I was just in the right mood for reading it.
He got away with it because he didn't mean to offend the person but to call out the behavior. He was also not heretical. His work did get banned by the Church for a while during the Reformation, which I find understandable, seeing that it could have easily confused people.
First time seeing your channel. Really liked your perspective about the book. As a not very religious person, I agree with the book getting somewhat hard to read by the ending (specially the bible parts), it felt like Erasmus kinda forgot he was writing as Folly and simply started saying all of his critiques towards the Church and its followers. Nonetheless, it still was very entertaining to read. The man really needs to be praised by his capacity of criticising so many different kind of people in so few pages and getting away with it, hahaha! Also, loved the Trump part. Greetings from Brazil!
I was impressed by Erasmus’ willingness to lampoon so many powerful people and institutions at a time when that could cost you your life. I loved that his descriptions couple still be so effectively used to skewer Trump.
I enjoyed reading this book immensely, and it had a major impact in my life. His critiques in the second half are harder to digest, but they are on point with the historical period that Erasmus lived in. The fact that he got away with all the criticism means much more than it initially may seem. It indicates that there was a shared sense of disbelief on the official narrative of the church, and a class of clergymen who knew that their position in society was a folly. They knew Erasmus was playing, but that he wasnt wrong.
Prof. Michael Sugrue has an excellent 45-minutes analysis of The Praise of Folly on one of his lectures available on UA-cam - for those who’d be interested. Very fascinating as well.
Really interesting discussion! I am shamed in my ignorance that I know absolutely nothing about Erasmus, but I feel like I learned a lot just from your review/discussion.
Ha! Some kind of wine and weirdly named food would have probably been more appropriate than scotch for an Aubrey Maturin discussion, but I prefer scotch. Thanks for watching.
Love your review. found it after diving into In Praise of Folly and i absolutely love your parallel of Trump in comparison to those selfish but powerful fools of Erasmus time. Alas they have always been with us. Although that offers some comfort that we may suffer through it with a sense of humor and comfort that his time will end but it makes you wonder if ever man will stop choosing or allowing such fools into powerful important roles when clearly they are not "Leaders
I'm afraid were are doomed to always have fools in power somewhere. We just have to do all we can to keep the fools out of power for as long as we can. Thanks for your kind words about the video.
@@BookishTexan Fools yes-- but Trump to another level ;) perhaps sometimes the leader is not a leader at all but in fact The Jester, put there partly to reflect back much of what is found within the masses, to bring it to light, to display the ugliness but also to laugh at it, to show us parts of ourselves.
I have this book called Fatal Discord about Erasmus and Luther that I need to finish at some point. Haven’t read any of Erasmus’ work but the book’s description of it sounded interesting. Great review. Never heard of this book but perhaps I’ll pick it up.
As a person who's not native English speaker, I found The Praise of Folly very hard to comprehend. I mean very hard. Can you please tell me which books on such topics from the Reinessance will be easy to understand for me?
It was originally written in Latin, so just find a translation in your own language. Otherwise your question is vague, what about the renaissance do you want to learn? Sounds like you want a text book, not primary sources. I found Thomas Mores 'utopia', a fairly easy read.
@@alanrobinson100 You've got my point. Thanks for the suggestion. My native language is Urdu, and it's hard to find such literature in Urdu translation.
The Penguin Classic edition that I read had a great introduction that put the work in its historical context and helped explain the satire. It was also annotated to explain Erasmus's references. I don't know if you have access to that kind of edition or if that is how you originally read it, but if not I would start with an annotated edition.
Hah. Wondered with UA-cam was pushing this video on my feed every time I came on - must be because I was watching some of your series on Racism in America. The connection took a while to become apparent though haha! Did wonder why it had 16 thumbs down.
My thumbs downers are usually a result of political disagreements. I assume that some of them didn't like what I said about Trump in this video. Additionally, I suspect a lot of students click on this video hoping for homework/test help and are disappointed.
Erasmus' attacks toward the church were measured and he always refrain from saying what he could have. He died within the church. However his comments toward other thinkers of the day were scathing. They used a lot of name calling and derogatory comments.
Great discussion. I remember reading this and thinking, So basically Erasmus had all the same criticisms of the Catholic Church as Luther? Sounds like I need that Penguin Classics edition with the intro, because I didn't really enjoy this book when I read it.
Thank you. Yes. As a historian I had always thought that there was a direct line from Erasmus to Luther. And, in some ways there is. But they disagreed strongly about a few obscure doctrinal issues and about the remedy to the problems of the Catholic Church.
Man, I was enjoying Praise of Folly, especially acutely social questions, which are still of of current interest. But maybe you didn't understand a very straightforward religious political questions, because you don't understand a difference between POTUS, every initiative of which can be rejected by the Senate, and Medieval absolute monarch? I guess politics and history is not your cup of tea, but what about a critical thinking and not eating every info you're feeding by? This is the main purpose of philosophy.
First, _Praise of Folly_ is a satire. Satires are, by definition, not "very straightforward." Second, the President of the United States has numerous powers that can be exercised without Senate/ Congressional approval or oversite. One example of this would be Executive Orders which the President can issue within the executive branch of the government that govern how policies are enforced. Trump issued 220 such orders in a four year term. Additionally the President can issue pardons without Congressional approval. He can also enter into executive agreements with the leaders of foreign nations without Senate approval and issue orders and directive within the US Military without Senate/Congressional approval Finally, because the Senate was controlled by the same party that Trump belonged to (Republican) they approved all of his appointees to the Supreme Court etc and did not attempt to limit his actions at all for political reasons. In fact, they failed to remove him from office after his first impeachment despite the fact that he clearly behaved corruptly and broke the law by withholding military aid from Ukraine in an attempt to force them to provide him with "dirt" that he could use against Joe Biden. Having taught both US History and United States government for three decades I can assure you that both subjects are my "cup of tea" and that you are in way over your head in regard to a discussion of either topic. In regards to my interpretation of Erasmus I welcome your thoughts. I searched your channel for your video discussing _Praise of Folly_ , but couldn't find one. I look forward to you making your own video on this or any other subject.
@@BookishTexan So, his initiatives can be turned down by Senate, Great Court, and then Senate as Great Court can start a procedure of impeachment. Wow, Trump really is a monarch which described there, no I would say more, an ancient tyrant! Weren't you called him racist as he wanted to shut down air connections with China and then blaming him for over 200k victims, because he didn't set a dictatorship mode? And it's really straightforward, you can call it satire, joke, parallel universe whatever. You're telling - he blames Church, kings etc and it's really something. XVI century was a time of biggest vacuum of power since falling of Roman Empire. Church was shattered after falling of Papacy state and Western Schism, states of Europe weren't empires yet but feudal fragmentations, constantly fighting within every kingdom and with neighbours at the same time. And here we go, the Reformation, core of American religion (so it's borderline an American history also) starts spreading all over the Europe exactly at this time. So it wasn't something special Erasmus was writing about, it was a logical constatation of historical processes. Savonarola, Jan Huus, Thomas More, Martin Luther were all talking basically the same, and not only they weren't dealt with quickly, but they had time to gain a huge number of followers and turn from simple disgruntled monks into a political force.
@@Romanus_Matthaeus First, in the passage that I read and said sounded like Trump, Erasmus wasn't describing the the of power by monarchs or their use of power, he was describing their character as leaders. Trump fits that description. Second, I didnt call it satire. It is a satire. Erasmus wrote it as satire. And satire, by design, isnt straightforward. Third, Executive Orders can not be "turned down by the Senate." Executive Orders can be overturned by the Supreme Court, but this is very rare. Pardons and orders that govern the military are likewise not subject to the oversite of the Senate. And it is not the Senate and the Supreme Court that have the power to remove the President from power. That process is a two part action taken by Congress -- The House of Representative begins it by bringing charges against the President (impeachment) and the Senate then conducts a trial and have the opportunity to remove the President from office. Please don't lecture me about the workings of the United States Government again until you learn about the processes you are attempting to describe. You make yourself look foolish. Finally, your history of the political and religious turmoil in Europe during the 15th and 16th century is great. I would argue that Portugal, Spain, France, and England were pretty stable monarchies at the time Erasmus wrote _Praise of Folly_ and the monarchs of all of those countries were still loyal supporters of the Catholic Church. But my question for you is, what does any of that have to do with the quote I read from _Praise of Folly_ that I said described Trump?
I find it disheartening when we are watching a video for interesting and thought provoking insight on the book or books being presented only to hear sidelined comments concerning politicians past or present or the fact that the presenter is actually atheist and considers faith as ignorance and stupidity. I hear these all the time. Just for the record, many viewers who are interested in books of depth may actually espouse conservative values and actually believe in God and a hereafter. Not everyone feels themselves as Godless animals. Please consider that your strength and attraction is in your sincere comment on the material in your hand and not so called witty comments on subjects that some of your most devoted viewers may hold dear. Nevertheless, I otherwise enjoy your channel and will keep on watching.
Thank you for your comment. I have to take issue with one thing you said. Nowhere in this video did I indicate that faith was ignorant or stupid. Not once. I talked about what Erasmus wrote. I know and get along with many conservatives and Christians including within my immediate family. If you follow my channel then you know that I do not shy away from sharing my political point of view here. I I have a platform and I use it. So if that bothers you my channel may not be for you. In my opinion the Erasmus quote I read describes Trump perfectly. If you can not see that then I suspect that you aren't a conservative so much as a Trump supporter. How any follower of Christ or Conservative principles can support the most vile man to ever be President is a complete mystery to me and it makes me question their commitment to the principles they espouse.
@@BookishTexan No sir , you didn't mention faith in your comments. I was alluding to other who have entered political comments and still others who make comments on faith. I realize that this is your platform and you certainly can discuss whatever you wish. I as a viewer can opt to remain a follower, jump off the video, rant against you as some have done in the past or simply respond by saying that your content is to my liking but not all your presentation. The comment section is our platform. I just think that the discussion of politics and potencial controversial subjects takes away from the enjoyment. Your right. It's your program. That is a legitimate line of defense for my opinion. And yes I can just unsubscribe. That would be a legitimate response from me. But then I would lose the enjoyment of watching your discussions. Since feedback isn't a gainful approach, I will remain silent and watch what I enjoy and leave off what I do t. By the way, I feel you were unfairly attacked on booktube and I think you responded well. And just a side note, I don't support Trump and didn't vote for him.
@@douglasreynolds7903 I am sorry that my response was sharply worded. I have dealt with a number of trolls over the years and I assumed you were one. You know what happens when someone assumes. Your comment about faith etc seemed to be directed at me. Since I try not to be anti-faith I took that personally. But I see that I read your comment incorrectly. I’m afraid that political comments will continue however. I now try to confine them to political content specific videos, but my commentary will still slip into videos.
One smelled the ignorance quickly when this guy said “punished by the church”. Eyes rolled to the back of my head. What a joke. Then reading ERASMUS, like a typical American, this guy brings it to Trump. Talk about living in a bubble. Surprised he didn’t quote some movie, as Americans are so fond of. The whole video is a Cringefest.
Your comment is a master class in pretentiousness! I have read it several times to revel in its complete lack of self awareness. “One smelled the ignorance quickly,” reads so much like a send up of poor writing that it took me several readings to realize you were serious. Can you smell ignorance? Does smelling quickly involve short intakes of air through the nose in rapid succession? If so is this kind of breathing something you do regularly? Does it make you light-headed? If you are alone while watching a youtube video and breathing this way, whose ignorance are you smelling quickly? In the spirit of your last line - “This whole video was a Cringefest” - let me quote John McClane from Diehard when he said,”Yippee ki aye, Mother F*cker!” (You see what I did there? I wouldn’t want the subtlety to be lost on you)
@@BookishTexan- yes. A rotting vase of flowers smells worse as you get close to it. The topic was attractive from afar. Your premises were acceptable at first. But as you went on… lord spare us, throw that dirty water out! POF is a panegyric on virtue narrated by Folly personified. The fact you didn’t “understand” the ‘highfalutin renaissance theology’ is not to your credit as a thinker… why do a “book review” on one of the most important texts in Christian history, if the climax of your exposition is “TrUmP!!!” Erasmus literally spoke of rich and poor and all their vices in between because it wasn’t an attack on one or another individual. His book wasn’t about a king or a prince. It was about you and me as human beings. The fact your feathers are so thoroughly ruffled tastes of insipid insecurity.
@@enzoselva888 Well bless your heart! You really are the gift that keeps on giving! I enjoyed your first response so much and now you have graced me with a second which is equally delicious! However, based on your second comment I fear that my response might have been a bit beyond your powers of discernment. In your latest I detect a note of defensiveness mixed with your previous lack of self-awareness. I will attempt to remedy that and in doing so make amends to you for the confusion which I have caused you. Lets start with a definition: Sense of Humor --a person's ability to perceive humor or appreciate a joke. In the part of my response where I quoted your unforgettable phrase, "“One smelled the ignorance quickly,” I was making fun of your choice of words by highlighting the ridiculousness of smelling ignorance and being able to smell ignorance while watching a video (you see video is a visual and auditory experience not an olfactory one). Your defense of your use of that memorable phrase, which involved comparing watching my video to being in a room with a vase of rotting flowers the smell of which became more noticeable the closer you got to them, highlights the fact that you didn't get the joke. In fact you compounded the joy I got from your hilarious phrase about having "smelled ignorance quickly" by creating an analogy in which the conditions you proposed are not at all analogous with the conditions of the actual event of watching my video: You aren't in a room with me, you can't "smell" ignorance, and in your analogy you describe gradually becoming aware of a bad smell, not quickly. I am still chuckling about this as I type. Your response to my comment also makes it clear that you did not (despite my signaling) get the subtlety of me quoting one of the most memorable lines from one of the most American of movies in response to your comment, "Surprised he didn't quote some movie, as Americans are so fond of." The use of the quote from Diehard wasn't an expression of anger or ruffled feathers, it was a satire of your pretentious comment about Americans. You see by playing off your stereotype I was drawing attention to its laughable snobbishness. Your inability to detect the satire in my response while criticizing my understanding of a great work of satire has brought me a great deal of mirth on many levels. As for my lack of deep understanding of In Praise of Folly, I make no defense. I did not realize that I was not to apply its words or examples to my experiences as a human being living in the United States in the 21st Century. I think the best solution to my ignorance, and something that would no doubt be edifying for the masses, would be for an expert such as yourself to make a video and post it on your channel in which you outline what we are and are not allowed to draw from our reading of In Praise of Folly. I hope you will consider my modest proposal and make just such a video.
Yeah and Mexico is paying for the wall, he has a better plan for health care that we are all going to love, trade wars are easy to win, he's going to eliminate the deficit, he didn't pay hush money to a porn star, and he isnt violating the emoluments clause. I think you need to read Erasmus more carefully.
Great to hear a discussion of an important book and such a wonderful man as Erasmus. Thanks for posting this!
Thank you.
I have exam tomorrow, thank you sir.
This was a very cogent review, and that final quote was spot on. I have tried to read In Praise of Folly in the past, but never stuck with it, I will give it another try due to your review. Thanks.
Thank you. Like I said, I really liked the first half or so, then I got bogged down near the end and just pushed through till I finished it. Its possible that I was just in the right mood for reading it.
He got away with it because he didn't mean to offend the person but to call out the behavior. He was also not heretical. His work did get banned by the Church for a while during the Reformation, which I find understandable, seeing that it could have easily confused people.
Thank you for sharing that information.
First time seeing your channel. Really liked your perspective about the book. As a not very religious person, I agree with the book getting somewhat hard to read by the ending (specially the bible parts), it felt like Erasmus kinda forgot he was writing as Folly and simply started saying all of his critiques towards the Church and its followers. Nonetheless, it still was very entertaining to read. The man really needs to be praised by his capacity of criticising so many different kind of people in so few pages and getting away with it, hahaha!
Also, loved the Trump part.
Greetings from Brazil!
I was impressed by Erasmus’ willingness to lampoon so many powerful people and institutions at a time when that could cost you your life. I loved that his descriptions couple still be so effectively used to skewer Trump.
I enjoyed reading this book immensely, and it had a major impact in my life. His critiques in the second half are harder to digest, but they are on point with the historical period that Erasmus lived in.
The fact that he got away with all the criticism means much more than it initially may seem. It indicates that there was a shared sense of disbelief on the official narrative of the church, and a class of clergymen who knew that their position in society was a folly. They knew Erasmus was playing, but that he wasnt wrong.
Thank you for the great comment. I enjoyed reading it though there were aspects that went over my head.
Prof. Michael Sugrue has an excellent 45-minutes analysis of The Praise of Folly on one of his lectures available on UA-cam - for those who’d be interested. Very fascinating as well.
Thank you for the recommendation!
Really interesting discussion! I am shamed in my ignorance that I know absolutely nothing about Erasmus, but I feel like I learned a lot just from your review/discussion.
Thank you. Goodness, don't be ashamed of not knowing anything about Erasmus. There are more important things and lots of stuff to read.
Scotch and the Aubrey Maturin series.....I just subscribed!
Ha! Some kind of wine and weirdly named food would have probably been more appropriate than scotch for an Aubrey Maturin discussion, but I prefer scotch. Thanks for watching.
Love your review. found it after diving into In Praise of Folly and i absolutely love your parallel of Trump in comparison to those selfish but powerful fools of Erasmus time. Alas they have always been with us. Although that offers some comfort that we may suffer through it with a sense of humor and comfort that his time will end but it makes you wonder if ever man will stop choosing or allowing such fools into powerful important roles when clearly they are not "Leaders
I'm afraid were are doomed to always have fools in power somewhere. We just have to do all we can to keep the fools out of power for as long as we can. Thanks for your kind words about the video.
@@BookishTexan Fools yes-- but Trump to another level ;)
perhaps sometimes the leader is not a leader at all but in fact The Jester, put there partly to reflect back much of what is found within the masses, to bring it to light, to display the ugliness but also to laugh at it, to show us parts of ourselves.
@@BookishTexan they are calling the new comet Erasmus it's getting closer to passing the 🌞
I have this book called Fatal Discord about Erasmus and Luther that I need to finish at some point. Haven’t read any of Erasmus’ work but the book’s description of it sounded interesting. Great review. Never heard of this book but perhaps I’ll pick it up.
_Fatal Discord_ sounds really interesting. There is a bit in the introduction about the disagreement between Erasmus and Luther. Thanks for watching.
Fatal Discord was excellent. An important work.
He was living in Holland, that’s why 🤣
Thanks for the details
As a person who's not native English speaker, I found The Praise of Folly very hard to comprehend. I mean very hard. Can you please tell me which books on such topics from the Reinessance will be easy to understand for me?
It was originally written in Latin, so just find a translation in your own language.
Otherwise your question is vague, what about the renaissance do you want to learn? Sounds like you want a text book, not primary sources.
I found Thomas Mores 'utopia', a fairly easy read.
@@alanrobinson100 You've got my point. Thanks for the suggestion. My native language is Urdu, and it's hard to find such literature in Urdu translation.
The Penguin Classic edition that I read had a great introduction that put the work in its historical context and helped explain the satire. It was also annotated to explain Erasmus's references. I don't know if you have access to that kind of edition or if that is how you originally read it, but if not I would start with an annotated edition.
Hah. Wondered with UA-cam was pushing this video on my feed every time I came on - must be because I was watching some of your series on Racism in America. The connection took a while to become apparent though haha! Did wonder why it had 16 thumbs down.
My thumbs downers are usually a result of political disagreements. I assume that some of them didn't like what I said about Trump in this video. Additionally, I suspect a lot of students click on this video hoping for homework/test help and are disappointed.
Erasmus' attacks toward the church were measured and he always refrain from saying what he could have. He died within the church. However his comments toward other thinkers of the day were scathing. They used a lot of name calling and derogatory comments.
thannks you sir
Is there a version using today's English and the modern meaning?
Brian, I enjoyed this greatly. Thanks for the 'Trump' quote. I'm off to read Erasmus now.
Thank you.
I like the illustrated version by the artist Holbein
Do you mean a painting of Erasmus or an illustrated edition of Praise of Folly. I would love to see an edition illustrated by Holbein.
@@BookishTexan ua-cam.com/video/cWGvPjNPo1U/v-deo.html
Your my president
Same
Please tell me what its Hindi translation
Erasmus wrote copia, how to say the same thing an many many different ways
Great discussion. I remember reading this and thinking, So basically Erasmus had all the same criticisms of the Catholic Church as Luther? Sounds like I need that Penguin Classics edition with the intro, because I didn't really enjoy this book when I read it.
Thank you. Yes. As a historian I had always thought that there was a direct line from Erasmus to Luther. And, in some ways there is. But they disagreed strongly about a few obscure doctrinal issues and about the remedy to the problems of the Catholic Church.
I think maybe Luther was influenced by Erasmus if i recall
Maybe not only of president trump but many politicians in general
That is true.
here is holbeins illustration shown after 7mins of this video ua-cam.com/video/cWGvPjNPo1U/v-deo.html
Thank you for sharing this.
@@BookishTexan Hard to get the illustrated book and expensive .I saw a used one and it was £19 ( think thats just under 24US)
Man, I was enjoying Praise of Folly, especially acutely social questions, which are still of of current interest. But maybe you didn't understand a very straightforward religious political questions, because you don't understand a difference between POTUS, every initiative of which can be rejected by the Senate, and Medieval absolute monarch? I guess politics and history is not your cup of tea, but what about a critical thinking and not eating every info you're feeding by? This is the main purpose of philosophy.
First, _Praise of Folly_ is a satire. Satires are, by definition, not "very straightforward."
Second, the President of the United States has numerous powers that can be exercised without Senate/ Congressional approval or oversite. One example of this would be Executive Orders which the President can issue within the executive branch of the government that govern how policies are enforced. Trump issued 220 such orders in a four year term. Additionally the President can issue pardons without Congressional approval. He can also enter into executive agreements with the leaders of foreign nations without Senate approval and issue orders and directive within the US Military without Senate/Congressional approval
Finally, because the Senate was controlled by the same party that Trump belonged to (Republican) they approved all of his appointees to the Supreme Court etc and did not attempt to limit his actions at all for political reasons. In fact, they failed to remove him from office after his first impeachment despite the fact that he clearly behaved corruptly and broke the law by withholding military aid from Ukraine in an attempt to force them to provide him with "dirt" that he could use against Joe Biden.
Having taught both US History and United States government for three decades I can assure you that both subjects are my "cup of tea" and that you are in way over your head in regard to a discussion of either topic.
In regards to my interpretation of Erasmus I welcome your thoughts. I searched your channel for your video discussing _Praise of Folly_ , but couldn't find one. I look forward to you making your own video on this or any other subject.
@@BookishTexan So, his initiatives can be turned down by Senate, Great Court, and then Senate as Great Court can start a procedure of impeachment. Wow, Trump really is a monarch which described there, no I would say more, an ancient tyrant! Weren't you called him racist as he wanted to shut down air connections with China and then blaming him for over 200k victims, because he didn't set a dictatorship mode?
And it's really straightforward, you can call it satire, joke, parallel universe whatever. You're telling - he blames Church, kings etc and it's really something. XVI century was a time of biggest vacuum of power since falling of Roman Empire. Church was shattered after falling of Papacy state and Western Schism, states of Europe weren't empires yet but feudal fragmentations, constantly fighting within every kingdom and with neighbours at the same time. And here we go, the Reformation, core of American religion (so it's borderline an American history also) starts spreading all over the Europe exactly at this time. So it wasn't something special Erasmus was writing about, it was a logical constatation of historical processes. Savonarola, Jan Huus, Thomas More, Martin Luther were all talking basically the same, and not only they weren't dealt with quickly, but they had time to gain a huge number of followers and turn from simple disgruntled monks into a political force.
@@Romanus_Matthaeus First, in the passage that I read and said sounded like Trump, Erasmus wasn't describing the the of power by monarchs or their use of power, he was describing their character as leaders. Trump fits that description.
Second, I didnt call it satire. It is a satire. Erasmus wrote it as satire. And satire, by design, isnt straightforward.
Third, Executive Orders can not be "turned down by the Senate." Executive Orders can be overturned by the Supreme Court, but this is very rare. Pardons and orders that govern the military are likewise not subject to the oversite of the Senate. And it is not the Senate and the Supreme Court that have the power to remove the President from power. That process is a two part action taken by Congress -- The House of Representative begins it by bringing charges against the President (impeachment) and the Senate then conducts a trial and have the opportunity to remove the President from office. Please don't lecture me about the workings of the United States Government again until you learn about the processes you are attempting to describe. You make yourself look foolish.
Finally, your history of the political and religious turmoil in Europe during the 15th and 16th century is great. I would argue that Portugal, Spain, France, and England were pretty stable monarchies at the time Erasmus wrote _Praise of Folly_ and the monarchs of all of those countries were still loyal supporters of the Catholic Church. But my question for you is, what does any of that have to do with the quote I read from _Praise of Folly_ that I said described Trump?
I find it disheartening when we are watching a video for interesting and thought provoking insight on the book or books being presented only to hear sidelined comments concerning politicians past or present or the fact that the presenter is actually atheist and considers faith as ignorance and stupidity. I hear these all the time. Just for the record, many viewers who are interested in books of depth may actually espouse conservative values and actually believe in God and a hereafter. Not everyone feels themselves as Godless animals. Please consider that your strength and attraction is in your sincere comment on the material in your hand and not so called witty comments on subjects that some of your most devoted viewers may hold dear. Nevertheless, I otherwise enjoy your channel and will keep on watching.
Thank you for your comment.
I have to take issue with one thing you said. Nowhere in this video did I indicate that faith was ignorant or stupid. Not once. I talked about what Erasmus wrote. I know and get along with many conservatives and Christians including within my immediate family.
If you follow my channel then you know that I do not shy away from sharing my political point of view here. I I have a platform and I use it. So if that bothers you my channel may not be for you.
In my opinion the Erasmus quote I read describes Trump perfectly. If you can not see that then I suspect that you aren't a conservative so much as a Trump supporter. How any follower of Christ or Conservative principles can support the most vile man to ever be President is a complete mystery to me and it makes me question their commitment to the principles they espouse.
@@BookishTexan No sir , you didn't mention faith in your comments. I was alluding to other who have entered political comments and still others who make comments on faith. I realize that this is your platform and you certainly can discuss whatever you wish. I as a viewer can opt to remain a follower, jump off the video, rant against you as some have done in the past or simply respond by saying that your content is to my liking but not all your presentation. The comment section is our platform. I just think that the discussion of politics and potencial controversial subjects takes away from the enjoyment. Your right. It's your program. That is a legitimate line of defense for my opinion. And yes I can just unsubscribe. That would be a legitimate response from me. But then I would lose the enjoyment of watching your discussions. Since feedback isn't a gainful approach, I will remain silent and watch what I enjoy and leave off what I do t. By the way, I feel you were unfairly attacked on booktube and I think you responded well. And just a side note, I don't support Trump and didn't vote for him.
@@douglasreynolds7903 I am sorry that my response was sharply worded. I have dealt with a number of trolls over the years and I assumed you were one. You know what happens when someone assumes.
Your comment about faith etc seemed to be directed at me. Since I try not to be anti-faith I took that personally. But I see that I read your comment incorrectly.
I’m afraid that political comments will continue however. I now try to confine them to political content specific videos, but my commentary will still slip into videos.
Erasmus of Rotterdam is an Augustinian. His writing also remind us of the stupidity of Joe Biden and his woke culture.
Erasmus was woke.
One smelled the ignorance quickly when this guy said “punished by the church”. Eyes rolled to the back of my head. What a joke.
Then reading ERASMUS, like a typical American, this guy brings it to Trump.
Talk about living in a bubble. Surprised he didn’t quote some movie, as Americans are so fond of.
The whole video is a Cringefest.
Your comment is a master class in pretentiousness! I have read it several times to revel in its complete lack of self awareness.
“One smelled the ignorance quickly,” reads so much like a send up of poor writing that it took me several readings to realize you were serious. Can you smell ignorance? Does smelling quickly involve short intakes of air through the nose in rapid succession? If so is this kind of breathing something you do regularly? Does it make you light-headed? If you are alone while watching a youtube video and breathing this way, whose ignorance are you smelling quickly?
In the spirit of your last line - “This whole video was a Cringefest” - let me quote John McClane from Diehard when he said,”Yippee ki aye, Mother F*cker!”
(You see what I did there? I wouldn’t want the subtlety to be lost on you)
@@BookishTexan- yes. A rotting vase of flowers smells worse as you get close to it. The topic was attractive from afar. Your premises were acceptable at first. But as you went on… lord spare us, throw that dirty water out!
POF is a panegyric on virtue narrated by Folly personified. The fact you didn’t “understand” the ‘highfalutin renaissance theology’ is not to your credit as a thinker… why do a “book review” on one of the most important texts in Christian history, if the climax of your exposition is “TrUmP!!!” Erasmus literally spoke of rich and poor and all their vices in between because it wasn’t an attack on one or another individual. His book wasn’t about a king or a prince. It was about you and me as human beings.
The fact your feathers are so thoroughly ruffled tastes of insipid insecurity.
@@enzoselva888 Well bless your heart! You really are the gift that keeps on giving! I enjoyed your first response so much and now you have graced me with a second which is equally delicious!
However, based on your second comment I fear that my response might have been a bit beyond your powers of discernment. In your latest I detect a note of defensiveness mixed with your previous lack of self-awareness. I will attempt to remedy that and in doing so make amends to you for the confusion which I have caused you.
Lets start with a definition:
Sense of Humor --a person's ability to perceive humor or appreciate a joke.
In the part of my response where I quoted your unforgettable phrase, "“One smelled the ignorance quickly,” I was making fun of your choice of words by highlighting the ridiculousness of smelling ignorance and being able to smell ignorance while watching a video (you see video is a visual and auditory experience not an olfactory one). Your defense of your use of that memorable phrase, which involved comparing watching my video to being in a room with a vase of rotting flowers the smell of which became more noticeable the closer you got to them, highlights the fact that you didn't get the joke. In fact you compounded the joy I got from your hilarious phrase about having "smelled ignorance quickly" by creating an analogy in which the conditions you proposed are not at all analogous with the conditions of the actual event of watching my video: You aren't in a room with me, you can't "smell" ignorance, and in your analogy you describe gradually becoming aware of a bad smell, not quickly. I am still chuckling about this as I type.
Your response to my comment also makes it clear that you did not (despite my signaling) get the subtlety of me quoting one of the most memorable lines from one of the most American of movies in response to your comment, "Surprised he didn't quote some movie, as Americans are so fond of." The use of the quote from Diehard wasn't an expression of anger or ruffled feathers, it was a satire of your pretentious comment about Americans. You see by playing off your stereotype I was drawing attention to its laughable snobbishness. Your inability to detect the satire in my response while criticizing my understanding of a great work of satire has brought me a great deal of mirth on many levels.
As for my lack of deep understanding of In Praise of Folly, I make no defense. I did not realize that I was not to apply its words or examples to my experiences as a human being living in the United States in the 21st Century. I think the best solution to my ignorance, and something that would no doubt be edifying for the masses, would be for an expert such as yourself to make a video and post it on your channel in which you outline what we are and are not allowed to draw from our reading of In Praise of Folly.
I hope you will consider my modest proposal and make just such a video.
Huh! Trump is working without a salary.
Yeah and Mexico is paying for the wall, he has a better plan for health care that we are all going to love, trade wars are easy to win, he's going to eliminate the deficit, he didn't pay hush money to a porn star, and he isnt violating the emoluments clause.
I think you need to read Erasmus more carefully.
I was good until the president trump comment.
If you can't see the parallel I guess you never will. Thanks for your comment.
Seems to fit sleepy joe a lot more.