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

FAQ

Expand Messages
  • poetcsw
    ExistList Brief FAQ Last Updated: 05-Apr-2003 1. What is the Exist List mailing list? This mailing list is a community interested in existentialism and
    Message 1 of 5 , Apr 5 11:23 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      ExistList Brief FAQ

      Last Updated: 05-Apr-2003

      1. What is the Exist List mailing list?
      This mailing list is a community interested in existentialism and
      phenomenology. Yes, Sartre, Nietzsche, and Kierkegaard, but also many
      others: Frankl, May, Jaspers, and Merleau-Ponty to name a few. This
      list encourages questions and exchanges of information. We want to
      know about the latest literature, articles, book releases, and more.

      2. How old is the list?
      The list was started in the late 1980s on the BITNET. It moved to
      FidoNet in 1992, then to OneList, eGroups, and finally landing at its
      current home on Yahoo Groups by 1999.

      3. Where exactly is the list?
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist

      4. Is there an "official" home page?
      http://www.tameri.com/csw
      I maintain the "Existential Primer" at the preceding URL. It is only
      a primer, not an all-inclusive look at existentialism, phenomenology
      and continental philosophy.

      5. Who is Wyatt?
      Visit the URL and read what I have posted. I am a reader and writer
      interested in philosophy.

      6. What are the rules of the list?
      No personal attacks. No lengthy discussions of specific religious
      issues (take those to other lists, please). No strong profanity (you
      know which words those would be). Be polite, and try to keep
      discussions on the topic of philosophy as much as possible.

      7. Is this group actively moderated?
      Ideally, no. Only violations of the "personal attack" rule are likely
      to result in a temporary "kick" from the list. We have never "banned"
      anyone from the list permanently and would like to keep it that way.
      Language violations receive a private warning, and that tends to be
      sufficient.

      To learn who moderates the group, visit the Yahoo site. You can also
      view membership options and lists at that site.

      8. Are there other features, beyond the mailing list?
      Yes. The Yahoo page and my page include links to other philosophy
      sites, databases for research, and even a live chat option.

      100. How can I get more information?

      Visit the Yahoo page for the mailing list. You can change your own
      membership options at that site.

      (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist)

      - C. S. Wyatt
    • Denise Drew
      ... (you ... Why is my name repeatedly referred to by Eduard as being someone else? Is this not a personal attack? I have plonked Eduard from my email.
      Message 2 of 5 , Apr 5 8:46 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "poetcsw" <existlist1@t...> wrote:
        > ExistList Brief FAQ
        >
        > Last Updated: 05-Apr-2003
        > 6. What are the rules of the list?
        > No personal attacks. No lengthy discussions of specific religious
        > issues (take those to other lists, please). No strong profanity
        (you
        > know which words those would be). Be polite, and try to keep
        > discussions on the topic of philosophy as much as possible.


        Why is my name repeatedly referred to by Eduard as being someone
        else? Is this not a personal attack? I have plonked Eduard from my
        email.


        Denise
      • Eduard Noo
        Is the following true or not? ... I am trying to discuss scientific existentialism. Is no-one interested? ************************* Nietzche is the greatest
        Message 3 of 5 , Apr 9 2:15 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Is the following true or not?

          > Be polite, and try to keep
          > discussions on the topic of philosophy as much as possible.


          I am trying to discuss scientific existentialism. Is no-one
          interested?


          *************************

          Nietzche is the greatest existentialist because he said that
          everything was absurd and there was no meaning in life.

          Of course there is no meaning in life! Everything is made up of
          atoms and eventually breaks down into atoms. Living things (which
          are merely groups of atoms) die and rot into atoms. Nonliving
          things (other groups of atoms) crumble to dust and eventually
          atoms. Atoms have no meaning so I have no meaning and you have no
          meaning because we are all collections of atoms. Everything is made
          up of atoms. Our minds are made up of atoms. Some of these atoms
          have formed neurons that keep us happy. Atoms also have no choice.
          Atoms just are.

          Neuroscience is the pinnacle of science and science is the only
          truth. Science is the foundation of existentialism. It is
          therefore obvious that science should guide the future direction of
          existentialism. Without science we would have no need for
          existentialism because science created the atoms out of which
          existentialism is formed and by which it is bound together.

          Nietzche did not take existentialism far enough! It is not good
          enough for life to be proven to be absurd by science and for science
          to prove that groups of atoms (called people) have no choice. One
          must also act existentially as an existentialist group of atoms with
          a bunch of atoms called neurons.

          It is easy to see that there is only one way forward. The Will to
          Death! It usually takes 58 years or more for the group of atoms
          called a human to rot back to atoms. Other useless objects formed
          by groups of atoms may take even longer.

          The aim in life is the make those neurons dead, to crumble those
          groups of atoms back to the purity of their original state - atoms.
          Each atom is attempting to break away from the group of atoms and be
          self-actualised as an individual atom. This is the atom's true and
          scientifically proven aim.

          The truly scientific existentialist will see the necessity for
          volunatry euthanasia as a means to enact the Will to Death and thus
          achieve self actualisation for each atom. The truly scientific
          existentialist will passionately desire the Will to Death
          immediately and liberate each atom.

          Please support scientific existentialists in their quest for
          immediate suicide as the only means to enact the Will to Death and
          help those poor individual atoms be self-actualised.

          ************************


          Ed
        • Trinidad Cruz
          Existentialism is living within the limitation of what things seem to mean. The existentialist does not need to know what things mean , only what they seem
          Message 4 of 5 , Jun 5, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Existentialism is living within the limitation of what things seem to
            mean. The existentialist does not need to know "what things mean",
            only what they "seem" to mean in an instant of existence. There is no
            always to meaning or being in existence, just suspecting and
            intuiting, and having to choose an action. The responsibility for that
            action is with the one acting, precisely because the action is based
            only on what "seems" to be. This view does not seperate emotion and
            thought, and is actually rational in a truer (authentic) sense than
            the dualist rational view. There is no view more rational than the
            existentialist's. The deconstructionist and anti-representational view
            of epistemology have spun out of existentialism, not vice versa. There
            is a difference. For the existentialist epistemology is always
            representational, (even in religious or teleological epistemology) but
            it can only argue for what seems to be within time and physical
            circumstances that themselves only seem to be. Existentialism in its
            limited view increases the scope of its view above any other
            philosophic praxis: by accepting a limitation to its human potential
            to view, by placing facticity in a rationally limited circumstance,
            and by thus opportuning truer (more authentic) activity within its
            limited view. Existentialism only seeks solidarity based upon these
            specific limitations in view. For the existentialist other is always
            conflict because human beings are within that "liberating constraint"
            of view - the "what seems to be." There is no constant "is" to
            existentialism, just possibilities for action.

            Trinidad Cruz
          • two_owl_night
            Right on the mark, and rational to boot! Mary ... to ... no ... that ... view ... There ... but ... constraint
            Message 5 of 5 , Jun 5, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Right on the mark, and rational to boot! Mary

              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Trinidad Cruz" <cruzprdb@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > Existentialism is living within the limitation of what things seem
              to
              > mean. The existentialist does not need to know "what things mean",
              > only what they "seem" to mean in an instant of existence. There is
              no
              > always to meaning or being in existence, just suspecting and
              > intuiting, and having to choose an action. The responsibility for
              that
              > action is with the one acting, precisely because the action is based
              > only on what "seems" to be. This view does not seperate emotion and
              > thought, and is actually rational in a truer (authentic) sense than
              > the dualist rational view. There is no view more rational than the
              > existentialist's. The deconstructionist and anti-representational
              view
              > of epistemology have spun out of existentialism, not vice versa.
              There
              > is a difference. For the existentialist epistemology is always
              > representational, (even in religious or teleological epistemology)
              but
              > it can only argue for what seems to be within time and physical
              > circumstances that themselves only seem to be. Existentialism in its
              > limited view increases the scope of its view above any other
              > philosophic praxis: by accepting a limitation to its human potential
              > to view, by placing facticity in a rationally limited circumstance,
              > and by thus opportuning truer (more authentic) activity within its
              > limited view. Existentialism only seeks solidarity based upon these
              > specific limitations in view. For the existentialist other is always
              > conflict because human beings are within that "liberating
              constraint"
              > of view - the "what seems to be." There is no constant "is" to
              > existentialism, just possibilities for action.
              >
              > Trinidad Cruz
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.