Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[Sartre] Re: distinction between organism and being

Expand Messages
  • Henry W. Peters
    ... Mary Jo... Though I will stand with my previous agreement with you, I will not with your restatement... of the relationships you articulate as quoted
    Message 1 of 6 , May 1 10:27 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      At 2:37 PM +0000 04/30/04, Mary Jo wrote:
      >can't see the forest for the trees. It's also the other two,
      >something and nothing. I think that existence and essence are
      >something, and everything else is nothing.

      Mary Jo...

      Though I will stand with my previous agreement with you, I will not
      with your restatement... of the relationships you articulate as
      quoted above...

      I would remind you that I did say my previous Apr 6 2004 statement
      to Tommy B. re this discussion:

      > I agree in the main with taking seriously the distinction listed (&
      > more) in the previous discussion...

      This might be a bit of a clue to the problem I have here.

      Probably would be helpful to go back to Being & Nothingness & review
      the relationships described by Sartre... I try to do this from time
      to time myself... usually come out with a little more light... No
      doubt, this a continuing & then possibly valuable discussion.

      Regardz,
      Henry
    • Mary Jo
      Yes, Henry. I admitted I strayed from Sartre s dialectic. Mary Jo ... (& ... review ... time
      Message 2 of 6 , May 1 2:19 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Yes, Henry. I admitted I strayed from Sartre's dialectic. Mary Jo

        --- In Sartre@yahoogroups.com, "Henry W. Peters" <hwpeters@j...>
        wrote:
        > At 2:37 PM +0000 04/30/04, Mary Jo wrote:
        > >can't see the forest for the trees. It's also the other two,
        > >something and nothing. I think that existence and essence are
        > >something, and everything else is nothing.
        >
        > Mary Jo...
        >
        > Though I will stand with my previous agreement with you, I will not
        > with your restatement... of the relationships you articulate as
        > quoted above...
        >
        > I would remind you that I did say my previous Apr 6 2004 statement
        > to Tommy B. re this discussion:
        >
        > > I agree in the main with taking seriously the distinction listed
        (&
        > > more) in the previous discussion...
        >
        > This might be a bit of a clue to the problem I have here.
        >
        > Probably would be helpful to go back to Being & Nothingness &
        review
        > the relationships described by Sartre... I try to do this from
        time
        > to time myself... usually come out with a little more light... No
        > doubt, this a continuing & then possibly valuable discussion.
        >
        > Regardz,
        > Henry
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.