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

Re: [existlist] Choosing Ford or BMW

Expand Messages
  • David Leon
    Eduard, Dude, chill out. Dont try to fuck with me just because I was trying my best to put into words what you expect to fall into your little lines and rules,
    Message 1 of 41 , May 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Eduard,
      Dude, chill out. Dont try to fuck with me just because I was trying my best
      to put into words what you expect to fall into your little lines and rules,
      lines and rules which you even obviously and admittedly have no clue about.
      You want me to talk about some fucked up god that doesn't really mean much
      of anything? What's that gonna prove? That's not realistic. I try to put
      into words a little bit of what God can really be, and you want me to sit
      here and tell you what? How you should pray to God and he will tell you the
      right color of car to buy? If you had a relationship with him, he might
      actually do that. Yeah, I'm a freak. I just wrote what I wrote. You want to
      go back and read it again?
      But if you dont understand anything about God on any realistic, big enough
      level, then what does "his" telling you what color of car to buy, and not
      just the type, or what specific car to buy, have anything to do with
      anything for you? A lot of people probably dont know ME very well, because
      they dont understand me. Or they might know things about me, and actually be
      ok with me, but still not understand. If you can do that with ME, why not
      with this "God"?

      What do you want to hear Eduard? A basic outline of realistic influences and
      experiences that people could have with God, as far as my knowledge can say,
      in relation to buying a car? Do you really care about that? Do you care to
      entertain explanations and ideas about the reality of God?
      Why would I just jump into details like that, and not talk about a general
      kind of reality? Do I just want you to take my details and make them sound
      as if I am just delusional, some misguided soul, or in need of my daily fix
      of pick-me-up, or a child not really concerned with overcoming or
      understanding my religion? Do you want a quick "rule" of thumb...some kind
      of "Such and so is the specific experience you would have in relation to
      buying a car, if you considered God in it, or the only static way of
      understanding how God influences your damned 'choice of a car'"? Cuz that's
      not realistic. It would be like I were TRYING to make God unrealistic. And
      on the other hand, am I supposed to answer as if I am just trying to defend
      what I already "believe"...that I dont really "know" or haven't really
      "learned" anything at all, because, after all, I must defend my beliefs -
      nevermind learning and reality!

      These are the things at stake. And if you really WANT me to talk about how
      this "God" must statically impact your buying a car in thus and so given
      way, then ..well, actually, go and find somebody else to do that, so you can
      in turn reduce such a "God" to just one situational force among the
      polytheism of just experiencing forces and dynamics and influences and
      actions - the experiences of life. But, GOD!?..that's a different story. Not
      a Biblical one, not a religious one, not a credal one, so to speak, but an
      academically logically verifiable, expandable learning about something ABOVE
      forces ..in the middle of everything and right in our hearts if we could
      accept it (as per 'Jesus'), but out and about and through everything too,
      not just trapped in YOUR 'heart' or ..desires, or anything else.

      Do you want to hear that this stuff isn't realistic? Isn't studiable? Or
      else, is that what you are trying to ACCUSE me of saying?
      Oh, it's academic, it's realistic, it's open, it's good as gold, right as
      rain and fine for the studying. But that might as well not be what you want
      to hear, eh? You might as well hear that there is some explanation for this,
      that I am just mistaken, that the simpler explanation is that I am making up
      a golden calf in my mind, that perhaps I am very GOOD at it. That is your
      simplest explanation. That is what you are toying with. But, what if it's
      NOT the simplest explanation..not the more logical path? If you could see a
      more logical path to inspire you with new thoughts, would you reject it? Cuz
      that wouldn't be very well scientific, would it?

      Well, I'm done.
      regards,
      Dave




      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "yeoman" <yeoman@...>
      To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 1:16 PM
      Subject: Re: [existlist] Choosing Ford or BMW


      > Dave,
      >
      > A response to this simple question would be very simple. It
      > would normally start out with -- "God has an impact on my
      > choice of car, because ... ".
      >
      > I get back to the Encyclopedia Britannica definition:
      >
      > "any of the various philosophies dating from about 1930 that
      > have in common an interpretation of human existence in the
      > world that stresses its concreteness and its problematic
      > character".
      >
      > I can now appreciate why this definition is considered to be
      > flawed. If Existentialism "stresses its concreteness", then
      > one would expect that a concrete example might be posed.
      > But it would appear that everyone here is trying their
      > hardest to stay away from considering the example. It is
      > much easier to deal with generalities ...
      >
      > eduard
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "David Leon" <dave@...>
      > To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 2:17 PM
      > Subject: Re: [existlist] Choosing Ford or BMW
      >
      >
      > > Eduard,
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: "yeoman" <yeoman@...>
      > > To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      > > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 9:09 AM
      > > Subject: [existlist] Choosing Ford or BMW
      > >
      > >
      > > > Mark et al,
      > > >
      > > > I keep asking the question within other email subjects.
      > > > Since no one has answered the question, I am asking
      > again
      > > > within a specific email.
      > > >
      > > > I wish to buy a car.
      > >
      > > Do you now?
      > >
      > > > The selection is down to either a
      > > > Ford or a BMW.
      > >
      > > Is it? So you dont wish to walk any farther than the house
      > of your neighbor
      > > who happens to be selling a ford and beemer?
      > >
      > > > I have no idea of what cars cost now-a-days,
      > > > so lets assume that I have sufficient funds to buy
      > either.
      > >
      > > Well, it mustn't much matter, since it's only your
      > neighbor we're talking
      > > about. Just look at his eyes when he quotes you a price.
      > Ponder how much you
      > > know, and how much you think you know, about him.
      > >
      > > > The statement has been made that a religious god has a
      > > > "dramatic and far reaching impact on our everyday
      > individual
      > > > being and moment by moment existence and choices".
      > >
      > > Oh, ok.
      > >
      > > > My understanding of Existentialism is that we have
      > freedom
      > > > of choice. If I recall correctly Sartre has said that
      > we
      > > > are condemned to this freedom.
      > >
      > > Help me! I am condemned!
      > > Yeah, that's one side of the coin, if Sartre never thought
      > of flipping it
      > > over. There might be more coins in the chest too. The one
      > side of the one
      > > coin might have been enough to fascinate him for quite a
      > while. Isn't this
      > > what we are all like, on whatever levels?
      > >
      > > > An "impact" is only an impact if in some fashion it
      > requires
      > > > that I do something against my desire for action.
      > >
      > > Wow, holy cow. You know, I haven't physically fought much,
      > but whenever I've
      > > gotten hit, I've never exactly since thought of it as
      > requiring me to go
      > > against my desire for action.
      > >
      > > > Or that I
      > > > am prevented in some fashion from taking a specific
      > action.
      > >
      > > Like beating down the guy that's bigger than me?? ..Maybe
      > I can find a way.
      > >
      > > > Thus the question -- How does a god [any god] have an
      > impact
      > > > upon my choice of car???
      > >
      > > Well, since, let's be honest insightful, you're albut
      > insinuating some kind
      > > of fight scenario--war, tensions, or even if recreational
      > beatdowns--then
      > > really, in my experience, I cant think of much that God
      > fits into this
      > > stuff, in all sincerity and depth. The only more positive
      > way to look at
      > > these types of scenarios of God, then, is with jokes.
      > C'mon, let's "be
      > > honest and insightful".
      > >
      > > If you really want to know anything of your answers,
      > though, the deeper
      > > stuff..then try to stop and try to ponder a bit (in this
      > context) a non-he,
      > > non-she, non-it, non-force, incendiary essence to your
      > buying of the car
      > > (not that you should confuse/labor yourself), just as the
      > essence to your
      > > everything else. And then when you think you are thinking
      > about the essence
      > > to these things, then think that all of that, anything you
      > think of may have
      > > a "meaning" to it...may have an unfolding, a sort of
      > script or..(just
      > > "essence", again), and that that essence, and those
      > essences are no more
      > > known by you than anything else, per se. That is, this
      > essence stuff is just
      > > as scientifically and logically open as anything else.
      > (That seems to be the
      > > point at which people fail, even if you get them to talk
      > about "essences",
      > > then they dont connect that to open ideas just like the
      > rest of sciences -
      > > everything needing to be built logically.) And there you
      > go...you've got a
      > > decent beginning...maybe. Just dont get too distracted by
      > religions or
      > > opinions or arguments and let them replace the kind of
      > thing I just
      > > described, and then maybe you'll be a little closer to
      > being realistic with
      > > God.
      > >
      > > Notice that in the midst of all that describing, I did not
      > bring up the idea
      > > of an entity, anything like a "person", or even a "source"
      > really. That's
      > > not because you somehow "are not allowed" to deal with
      > issues of an "entity"
      > > of "God" and ask if there could be such a thing or what
      > that is, but it is
      > > because without what I described, you cant talk about God.
      > That might sound
      > > silly, as if "You cant talk about God without forgetting
      > about him." ...but
      > > that is pretty much correct. As long as one is concerned
      > about 'him', or
      > > about ignoring him, how can you 'see' him? That might as
      > well be as if you
      > > are going to conjure up a wife by thinking about her
      > before you met her.
      > > Sure, we do do that, but...
      > >
      > > To noone in particular: "Roam in thought. Maybe you'll
      > find a few guides.
      > > Just dont act TOO surpised at learning where or even what
      > those guides might
      > > be."
      > > Then, to turn back to the topic at hand, Do you think this
      > little proverb to
      > > be unfriendly to a God? ..Well, at the least, not everyone
      > must needs have
      > > that conception, even if you would still try to tell me it
      > is impossible to
      > > simply "enjoy" and say "God" at the same time, because at
      > least for me, that
      > > all but IS my experience of God.
      > >
      > > Umm...well..have a day! (Wear the blue shirt tomorrow. It
      > brings out your
      > > eyes.)
      > > Dave
      > >
      > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
      > Sponsor ---------------------~-->
      > > Make Money Online Auctions! Make $500.00 or We Will Give
      > You Thirty Dollars for Trying!
      > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KXUxcA/fNtFAA/uetFAA/ACsqlB/TM
      > > ----------------------------------------------------------
      > -----------~->
      > >
      > > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      > > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
      > >
      > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      > > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
      >
      > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
    • Mark and Bev Tindall
      ... I can see why you are reluictant to answer my questions on why art is a valuable resource in Existentialism. ... If begins a conditional proposition.
      Message 41 of 41 , May 2, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        eduard wrote:


        > I can see why you are reluctant to answer the
        > question.


        I can see why you are reluictant to answer my questions on why art is a valuable resource in Existentialism.


        > If I have absolute freedom [Read Chris' FAQs]


        'If' begins a conditional proposition. Chris is wrong if he says all have absolute freedom. No-one has absolute freedom. All are constrained by at least time and space.


        > As Sartre has said, it is of no importance to
        > Existentialism.


        Sartre was wrong in this area and is not the final word on anything. There are many living Existentialist philosophers who disagree with the dead Sartre.

        As Chris stated (though he is not the final word on Existentialism ...) :

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

        No one should ever suggest that the Christian Existentialists (notably the Catholic movement is of interest to me), are not valid topics. They are frequently credited with developing concepts of ethics within existentialism, as well as combining Democratic Socialism with the humanistic aspects of existentialism set forth by the "French Left" for too long.

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

        Christian Existentialism is Existentialist in nature.


        Mark

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.