So there I am, in the UL writing an essay about volcanic eruption styles, when I get politely accosted by a member of the Japanese film crew that’s been in the library for the past few days. She asked if I was free to attend a sample philosophy lecture for an hour or so as they needed more students to attend for their film. Feeling procrastinatorial and helpful, I agreed.
Confusion does not even begin to cover the lecture’s contents. Words such as “metonymical”, “epistemology”, “hypernomia”, “similitude” and “phalanstery”, along with phrases like “the theory of sublimation” and (my personal favourite) “the binary praxis of neoexistentialism” were bandied about as casually as a football at a kickabout in the park on a Bank Holiday. Other topics included the causes of foot fetishism and deja vu (and that they’re probably caused by the same thing apparently), although someone suggested deja vu is caused by experiencing whatever it is that’s causing the deja vu in a previous life, while another “plausible” explanation was that your spirit flows through time and space in a fluid fashion.
I’m still confused by the whole thing really. Is philosophy really like that, and everything said is totally serious, or was it an elaborate joke? Slightly awkwardly, a few jokes were incorporated into the lecture, but (what with me very much being a scientist rather than an arts student) they went completely over my head. There was a reason why I gave up the arts at school. Now I can confirm that was a good move!
Don’t get me wrong though, everyone was very nice. It’s just that philosophy very much isn’t for me!