Talk:Eo ipso

In longer phrases
Is "eo ipse dixit dominus domino" a common phase? —DIV (128.250.204.118 10:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC))

Forms
Is "eo ipse" just another grammatical form? —DIV (128.250.204.118 10:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC))

Relevance
The Kierkegaard quote does not seem to provide any clarity to use of the term "eo ipso". In fact, the Danish specifies a female artist, which is directly relevant to the reviewer being "gallant". If the reviewer acknowledges her (the artist) as an artist, then - eo ipso - he should restrict himself to addressing her artistry. If he instead seeks, gallantly, to speak e.g. of her sustained beauty, then he is addressing her as e.g. a woman, perhaps a desirable one - which is actually to insult her as an artist, since he is not addressing her as an artist at all. Further, since she is someone who has actually chosen to live her life in expression of a particular ideal (an artist), if he has not made such an existential choice, but is e.g. only a bumbling mish-mash, perhaps a 'gentleman-reviewer', then his error is double - misunderstanding her, as a result of misunderstanding himself. While she has chosen to be something definite, he expresses only that he has not understood even what it is to choose. Talk of Ideals requires qualitative clarifications, and the term 'eo ipso' is useful in concentrating the mind on the differences, the distinctions. A quotation of this sort, without clarification, serves only to discredit the source and genre. WigglyWoggly (talk) 20:22, 15 February 2017 (UTC)