We had to read An Essay on Criticism by Alexander pope and answers some questins. I spent my weekend trying to figure out one of the questions-Could someone please help
"Those Rules of old discover'd, not devis'd Are Nature still, but Nature Medthodiz'd Nature like Liberty is but restrain'd By the same laws which frst herself ordain'd
The question is this is a paradox and means what?
The laws of natue are old, yet still apply today
Nature must abide by the rules that nature created
Nature is at once wholly wild and wholly restrained
The laws of nature were both created and discovered
Rules that were created of old are now being rediscovered
I was thinking the answer was: Nature must abide by the rules that Nature itself created?? But I'm not sure-I have researched every site there was and I'm still not sure about the paradox- Please help with an opinion
Here's the paradox:
"Nature like Liberty is but restrain'd By the same laws which frst herself ordain'd ... "
Nature is restrained by the laws of Nature!! And so is Liberty.
Then would the answer be Nature is at once wholly wild and wholly restrained or would it still be Nature must abide by the rules nature itself created because that sounds alot like your interpretation "Nature is restrained by the laws of nature." I'm still not sure-I know Pope thought raw nature could be improved so I'm thinking that it is wild by could be restrained or improved by man?? That was the philosophy of the neoclassicists, correct? They believed in elegant language, etc;-
Thank you agin for any input or help
Yes, this is it:
Nature must abide by the rules nature itself created.
thank you very much
You're very welcome!
Based on the given excerpt from Alexander Pope's "An Essay on Criticism," the intended meaning of the paradox is that "Nature must abide by the rules that nature created." Your interpretation aligns with the intended meaning of the paradox. It suggests that although nature is inherently free and unrestricted, it is still bound by the laws that it imposed on itself. This contradiction between freedom and restraint creates a paradoxical situation.
To arrive at this interpretation, it is helpful to break down the key lines:
1. "Those Rules of old discover'd, not devis'd"
This line suggests that the rules being referred to were not invented or created by someone but rather discovered from observing nature.
2. "Are Nature still, but Nature Methodiz'd"
Here, Pope states that these rules are still connected to nature. They are not separate from it but rather a logical organization and systematization of its principles.
3. "Nature like Liberty is but restrain'd
By the same laws which first herself ordain'd"
In these lines, Pope introduces the paradox. He states that nature, like freedom, is constrained or "restrained" by the very laws that it established for itself.
By combining these lines, the paradoxical nature of the situation is evident. Nature, which is typically associated with freedom and wildness, is paradoxically limited by the laws it created for its functioning. This paradox highlights the idea that nature itself follows its own rules, and it must abide by them, making it simultaneously self-restrained and free.
Therefore, your interpretation that "Nature must abide by the rules that Nature itself created" is accurate and aligns well with the intended meaning of the paradox in the given excerpt.