BackReturn Home

Full Title: The Trivium
The Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric; Understanding the Nature and Function of Language
Author(s): Sister Miriam Joseph, C.S.C., Ph.D.
Publishing / Edition: Paul Dry Books, 2002

Click here for the Table of Contents of the book



Content Review

This book is a testament to clarity in thought and eloquence in its transmission. Tables throughout helpfully summarize the concepts.

So many subtle distinctions are made within the first chapter alone that one could gain a lifetime of understanding just from reading and contemplating its contents. The Trivium is therein defined as:
Logic, grammar, and rhetoric consitute the trivium [...] Logic is the art of thinking; grammar, the art of inventing symbols and combining them to express thought; and rhetoric, the art of communicating thought from one mind to another, the adaptation of language to circumstance.
This is contrasted with the Quadrivium:

Aspect Subject General Meaning
Discrete Quantity Arithmetic The Theory of Number
Music The Application of the Theory of Number
Continuous Quantity Geometry The Theory of Space
Astronomy The Application of the Theory of Space

[Note: This is a bit different from how we have defined them here.]

In short, The Trivium (3) + The Quadrivium (4) = The Seven Liberal Arts

One thing that I find incredibly insightful about this book is how it highlights that even the most basic use of language seems to point to every Particular Form being continually connected to Universal Ideas. To quote pages 21-22:
The intellect through abstraction produces the concept. The imagination is the meeting ground between the senses and the intellect. From the phantasms in the imagination, the intellect abstracts that which is common and necessary to all the phantasms of similar objects (for example, trees or chairs); this is the essence (that which makes a tree a tree or that which makes a chair a chair). The intellectual apprehension of this essence is the general or universal concept (of a tree or a chair).

A general concept is a universal idea existing only in the mind but having its foundation outside the mind in the essence which exists in the individual and makes it the kind of thing it is. Therefore, a concept is not arbitrary although the word is. Truth has an objective norm in the real.

A general concept is universal because it is the knowledge of the essence present equally in every member of the class, regardless of time, place, or individual differences. For example, the concept "chair" is the knowledge of the essence "chair," which must be in every chair at all times and in all places, regardless of size, weight, color, material, and other individual differences.

The real object (a tree or a chair) and likewise the corresponding percept and phantasm, is individual, material, limited to a particular place and time; the concept is universal, immaterial, not limited to a particular place and time.

Only human beings have the power of intellectual abstraction; therefore, only human beings can form a general or universal concept. Irrational animals have the external and internal senses, which are sometimes keener than those of humans. But because they lack the rational powers (intellect, intellectual memory, and free will), they are incapable of progress or of culture. Despite their remarkable instinct, their productions, intricate though they may be, remain the same through the centuries, for example: beaver dams, bird nests, anthills, beehives.
To speak more broadly, Robert Campbell mentions this same connection in reference to our ability to generalize into archetypes, and this was well understood by many ancient peoples. One could reasonably argue that such a concept is at the root of all religions, pointing to a "perennial philosophy", "primordial tradition", or "prisca theologia" underlying them. We are exiting Plato's cave and seeing the forms that project their shadows upon its walls.

Image from The Unification of World Religion by Wai H. Tsang

Where the difficulty arises is with "simulacra" (i.e.: when the symbol is mistaken for the symbolized), particularly through how we use the verb "to be". It tends to reduce the nuance of experiences into false dichotomies. The field of General Semantics provides some interesting concepts and tools for overcoming that tendency, for example:

Structural Differential / Ladder of Abstraction - a tool which helps one to distinguish between the representation of a thing within the mind (e.g.: language or symbol), and the thing itself

E-Prime - a manner of writing or speaking that does not use the verb "to be", but rather, replaces it with expressions like "seems to"; these highlight how opinions can be based in personal perceptions

Non-Aristotelian Logic - a form of reasoning without a hard binary (e.g.: "true" and "false"); it includes "many-valued logics" (like "trinary" and "fuzzy"), that allow for a whole range of different categories, degrees, or probabilities to which a certain label might be applicable to a given situation

Integral Theory is also useful in this regard.

[In Progress...]



Related Resources