[Milton-L] assumptions about the fruit, a question for john leonard

Michael Gillum mgillum at unca.edu
Fri Apr 11 16:55:28 EDT 2014


Oh my. Oydin has taken us out of the endgame and back to Greg's opening
move, which was "Do you concede that multiple specimens of the FF kind
would have the same taste?" She separates "taste" as in esters, sugars,
etc., from "taste" as percept. A strong parry, justifying an "!" in the
chart of the match.

:)


On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Uzakova, Oydin Yashinova <
oydin.uzakova at okstate.edu> wrote:

>   Perhaps the last move could be:
>
>
>  The "taste" of the fruit of the forbidden tree is "unique" only in so
> far as it is prohibited from being known without disobeying the creator,
> because as soon as one tastes the forbidden fruit and thus has a chance to
> compare its flavor with other fruits, it becomes impossible.  Becoming
> immediately postlapsarian, this "new" taste cannot be accurately compared
> to prelapsarian Adam and Eve's tastes of Eden's other fruits.
>
>
>  Also, is it completely unthinkable to rephrase God's prohibition the
> following way: you must not eat the fruit of this particular (apple) fruit
> tree, *growing next to the Tree of Life*, nor is there any need for you
> to want it, since there are so many other similar (apple) fruit trees in
> the garden.  In other words, if a parent prohibits his children to taste
> apples from one particular apple tree while allowing them to do so from all
> of the other apple trees of the same species in the orchard, he still can
> say "amid the choice/Of all tastes else to please their appetite."  The
> children would still be tempted to taste the seemingly same apples from
> that "interdicted" apple tree simply because it was singled out by their
> parent.  That is why this particular (apple) tree's location is so
> important since there is no other sign of its difference from other trees
> of the same species.  That is also why Eve had to be physically brought to
> it by Satan before she realized that the fruit tree in question was in fact
> the forbidden one.
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu <
> milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu> on behalf of Michael Gillum <
> mgillum at unca.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, April 11, 2014 2:43 PM
>
> *To:* John Milton Discussion List
> *Subject:* Re: [Milton-L] assumptions about the fruit, a question for
> john leonard
>
>   I guess no one has laid out Greg's implied argument. This is how I
> understand it:
>
>  "So easily obeyed amid the tastes / Of all fruits else." A&E have the
> choice of all flavors different from the flavor of the forbidden fruit. If
> there were multiple trees of the FF kind bearing the same fruit, they would
> taste the same as the FF, and so would be forbidden.  However, we know that
> God singled out one particular tree for prohibition, the one growing next
> to the Tree of Life. Therefore, it seems that there are not multiple
> specimens of that kind.
>
>
>  I haven't figured out what Greg thinks would be Black's last move.
> --Michael G.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Milton-L mailing list
> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> Manage your list membership and access list archives at
> http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
>
> Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20140411/f0ac47cd/attachment.html>


More information about the Milton-L mailing list