Giovanni Pico della Mirandola

The above text may be an accurate representation of how I personally understand the Renaissance-era philosophy of Pico della Mirandola (1463-1493). Though sometimes categorized as a Neoplatonist, Pico's solution to the problem of One and the Many may only be fully understood by recognizing the influence that Aristotelian, Scholastic, Arabic, and Kabbalistic ideas had on his philosophy. Similar to 15th-century Florentine Humanists' attempts of applying their love of antiquity to contemporary moral problems, Pico created a synthesis of seemingly incompatible systems, as evident in the methodology employed to write his 900 Theses, as well as the posthumously-titled Oration on the Dignity of Man, which is a defense of the fore-mentioned Theses.

The solution postulated by Pico was revolutionary: instead of following the Neoplatonist belief that Being (the many) is an imperfect representation of the One (which was seen as God in the Renaissance Christian context), or that a separation exists between the two only in the human mind (an Aristotelian mind/body dualistic notion), Pico advanced the idea that Being is a material emanation of the One. This can be seen as a philosophical foundation to Pico's Oration, where because Being (people, for example) are a symbol of God, just their participation in the world may be seen as evidence of Divine Grace and Truth.

These ideas formed sharp contrast to the scholastics' (namely Thomas) approaches to the One and the Many, where it was formulated that Being is primarily defined by what is was not (i.e. God). Pico's ideas have been said to be a exemplar of Renaissance philosophy: bridging a gap between all schools of thought to form a new way of thinking about the capabilities and nature of man. What I've been thinking is how Pico may have informed Giorgio Vasari's belief that artists' creations are a mirror for Divine Creation (so a visual manifestation of Truth). I guess I'll keep researching and see what else I can find...

Above is a portrait of Pico, looking like the lead singer of Megadeth...

First Post and Civil Liberties!

Because I'm an art student, nine months out of the year are spent inhaling noxious fumes in the school's ill-ventilated studios and discussing topics like Formalism vs. Conceptual art-making. All of this is okay (because I'm a smoker anyways and enjoy riling myself up over obscure issues) but it does little in the way of satisfying my interest in political science. So during break, I try to play catch-up with current events...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/22/us/politics/22obama.html

The preceding New York Times article focuses on President Obama's recent speech at the National Archives. The speech was basically a defense of both continuations and changes from Bush-era policies concerning detainees at Guantanamo Bay. He "also said he would move to 'construct a legitimate legal framework' to justify the detention of dangerous terrorism suspects who could not be tried or released, a proposal that is creating unease among human rights advocates who are among his staunchest backers."

"Unease" is an inadequate description of how I feel about the manipulation of civil liberties in the spirit of political pragmatism. A legal system that holds suspects for an undetermined period of time, when there is inadequate evidence to bring a case to trial, is an unjust system: it is in violation of the Fifth Amendment's due process clause ("nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law"); and the right to a speedy trial via the sixth Amendment.

Whatever new laws that will be created (the "legitimate legal framework") to detain suspects without trial will be retroactive legislation and therefore inherently illegitimate. As American jurist Ron L. Fuller wrote in The Morality of Law, it is contrary to any notion of American justice to try a suspect for a crime that was not a crime when it was (possibly) committed.1

National Security is, and should continue to be a primary concern for our government. Also, detainees that are being held in Guantanamo are not American citizens so there has been justifiable controversy as to whether the suspects may fall under the jurisdiction of US civilian courts or military tribunals. Regardless, as far as the issue of holding suspects without trial is concerned, I find it highly disturbing that this administration has decided to continue on the path of attempting to appear to promote democracy, while simultaneously behaving contrary to both the ideology and text of the US Constitution.

1. Lon L. Fuller. The Morality of Law. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969. p. 39.