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

Re: hello!

Expand Messages
  • Brandon Roshto
    ... You assert that we have the capacity to think of something infinite. Maybe we can think of something infinite, but the big question is can we comprehend
    Message 1 of 33 , Oct 4, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      On Sun, 3 Oct 1999, Matt Kirby wrote:

      > From: "Matt Kirby" <max.kirby@...>
      >
      > "If we have the capacity to think of something infinite then something
      > infinite must have put that thought there." I can not recall who said that
      > but hopefully it will get some more discussion going.
      > Kirby


      You assert that we have the capacity to think of something infinite.
      Maybe we can think of something infinite, but the big question is can we
      comprehend the infinite. I don't know. It seems to me that humans are
      rational beings. I think of infinity as irrational therefore how can we
      comprehend it. Don't misunderstand me I don't deny the infinite, I'm just
      skeptical that we can understand it
      BRandon



      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Meghan <freelance@...>
      > To: <existlist@onelist.com>
      > Sent: Sunday, October 03, 1999 8:59 PM
      > Subject: Re: [existlist] hello!
      >
      >
      > > From: Meghan <freelance@...>
      > >
      > > <<I would love to hear from the members of this e-mail group how each has
      > > chosen to fit God into Existentialism ... or removed him.>>
      > >
      > > Dr. Herbert Hochberg (under whom I studied ethics, and then later
      > > existentialism) once brought up the following point during a class
      > > discussion of Kierkegaard: the idea of God is the pinnacle of absurdity.
      > > So to believe in God while fully cognizant of this fact shows the utmost
      > > faith.
      > >
      > > To be a devout Christian requires a leap of faith. To be a devout
      > > Christian as well as an existentialist -- well, that widens the chasm you
      > > leap. How's that?
      > >
      > >
      > > -Meghan (presently in the midst of Descartes and Berkley, and longing for
      > > my beloved Camus)
      > >
      > > p.s. FWIW, I'm a philosophy junior at the University of Texas at Austin,
      > > with a concentration in axiology and existentialism. I plan to get my
      > > master's in continental philosophy here as well.
      > >
      > >
      > > _____________________
      > >
      > > http://nettrash.com/users/meghan/enter.html
      > >
      > > "Lead me not into temptation; I can find the way myself."
      > >
      > > -- Rita Mae Brown
      > >
      > > > From The Exist List...
      > > http://userzweb.lightspeed.net/~tameri
      > >
      >
      > > From The Exist List...
      > http://userzweb.lightspeed.net/~tameri
      >
    • poetcsw
      ... Anything relating to existentialism or phenomenology can be asked or explored for discussion. It is important that discussions not attack anyone,
      Message 33 of 33 , May 4, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Denise Drew" <skindividual@y...> wrote:

        > Why can this not be addressed?
        >
        >
        > Denise

        Anything relating to existentialism or phenomenology can be asked or
        explored for discussion. It is important that discussions not attack
        anyone, regardless of his or her views and/or misunderstandings. If
        another member notices a factual or historical error, a correction
        should be offered politely and with a proper tone.

        Existentialism applies to a broad range of philosophers, not one group
        over any other. Also, educating members should include more than
        telling them what to read -- it should offer an explanation as to why
        a book, play, or essay is of value.

        As an example: I did not see the posts calling Ayn Rand an
        existentialist. I think there was a question about her, and a polite
        explanation of her beliefs would have been in order. She was in
        opposition to Sartre, and a bitter oponent at that. Explaning why and
        how would offer value to the group. Unfortunately, I think the student
        asking the question felt attacked and left to ask me the question
        privately.

        We need to answer things, not attack each other. When a post is
        negative in tone, whatever value it has is lost and ignored. I tend to
        skip most posts that call me a name anywhere in the post, and I think
        most people would do the same.

        As for comments about degrees and what-not: I do not attack the
        credentials of others, though I did point out that formal education
        alone is not the only form of credential. There was no sarcasm or
        dislike in that -- merely a point that everyone here might have
        something of value to add.

        My "existential" education was from a French-born professor who has
        moved to this area. I spent hours at his house in the summers, working
        on books together. That was more valid that any of my university
        courses -- many of which were on the topic, but poorly taught.

        So, those were my points.

        - CSW
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.