The essay must respond to two questions regarding Aztec philosophy, so two pages per answer for the total of four. No introductory paragraphs, just straight into the response. Each answer must be supported by evidence from any of the documents attached to this order. No outside sources are needed unless its to guide
These are the questions that must be answered are:
1) What according to the readings are the differences between path-seeking and truth-seeking understandings of the nature of philosophy? Why think that Mexica embrace a path-seeking rather than truth-seeking understanding? Why think the Franciscans are truth-seekers? What confusion does this create when the first twelve Franciscans and surviving Mexica elite try to converse with one another? Explain.
2)(a) What is agonistic inamic unity? Explain each component of this thesis: agonism; inamic; and unity. What are some examples of inamic pairs according to Mexica metaphysics? What are not some examples of agonistic inamic unity?
(b) Explain how agonistic inamic unity is compatible with ontological monism.
(c) Explain how agonistic inamic unity helps explain the Mexica thesis that all things are irreducibly ambiguous.
(d) How does agonistic inamic unity differ from the conception of dualism or duality that tends to characterize Western religions and Western philosophies? Explain.
(e) Who/what is Ometeotl? How does Ometeotl embody agonistic inamic unity? Explain.
(f) How did Mexica artists portray the notion of agonistic inamic unity? Give examples.
