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


Expand Messages
  • louise
    Dec 9, 2006
      Yes, sorry, the wording of my first sentence in particular is rather
      unclear. I shall try to expand and explain. From my experience,
      mainly in the 'eighties, of reading some academic and literary
      journals, I gained the impression that many of those who lecture in
      philosophy for a living, some of whom would be original authors
      themselves in their subject, rather than publishing only critiques
      or biographies of established authors of the canon, might be
      expected to take a pragmatic, not an existentialist, approach. That
      is, anyone actually intending to base the conduct of his day-to-day
      life, in all the complexity of its moral detail, on philosophically
      rigorous thinking, as outlined in a lecture course, would be liable
      to being considered mad, or dangerous, or both. The treatment
      accorded to both Kierkegaard and Nietzsche by their contemporaries,
      or, even now, to their reputations, also confirms me in this
      impression. That is only a beginning, lacking in specifics, but if
      you or others are interested, I could attempt to add more detail,
      perhaps tomorrow.

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Herman B. Triplegood" <hb3g@...>
      > Louise:
      > Can you specify what it is you see there you disagree with?
      > Hb3g
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
      > >
      > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Herman B. Triplegood" <hb3g@>
      > > wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Hi Louise:
      > > >
      > > > Yeah, well, when it comes down to it, those texts. whether
      > > are
      > > > on the reading list or not, were written by individuals. Each
      > > > philosopher does indeed bring his own unique personality, and
      > > > circumstances, to what he has to say there. To me, it is a
      > gesture
      > > of
      > > > respect to keep firmly in my mind the fact that for most of
      > > > thinkers the reasons why they took the time to write down what
      > > they
      > > > thought is because philosophy personally mattered very much to
      > > them
      > > > and it made a profound difference in how they led their lives.
      > > That
      > > > is the sense in which philosophy, it seems to me, is a
      > > > individual thing. Why do it if it doesn't matter on the level
      > > > personal choices? There is a human being behind every book.
      > >
      > >
      > > Herman,
      > >
      > > I'm quite doubtful about the truth of what you are saying here,
      > > though it may be more evident in the works of philosophers
      > > later than those you have mentioned. The details of a life, and
      > the
      > > thought produced by the mind who lives that life, in fleshly
      > > form, have complex inter-relationship. If the relationship were
      > > straightforward, and we could all freely discuss thought in
      > relation
      > > to our societies, without fear of social antagonism or legal
      > > prosecution, I for one would probably not be posting to an
      > > site, more likely I would have sought to qualify to teach in a
      > > university. To my own perception, existentialism throws down
      > > challenge to a wider society, concerning how our thought,
      > > and actions cohere in themselves, to our individual nature, and
      > > our bearing toward our fellows.
      > >
      > > Louise
      > >
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic