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

Re: [existlist] Re: flockless

Expand Messages
  • Albert
    Louise And yes, I write financial accounting systems for a living. I am not very learned when it comes to the arts. This is not to say though that I am
    Message 1 of 8 , Feb 2, 2006
      Louise

      And yes, I write financial accounting systems for a living. I am not very learned when it comes to the arts. This is not to say though that I am completely left brain dominant.
      But please indulge me ?

      Albert.

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: louise
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 8:18 PM
      Subject: [existlist] Re: flockless


      Albert,

      You amaze me. From my perspective, your response seems staggeringly
      narcissistic. We are not acquainted - how may I shrug you off?? If
      I have incorrectly inferred that you had read little of Kierkegaard,
      and cared less, I apologise. I was just, well, gobsmacked, that
      both you and Bill seemed to see him as an agnostic. Knowing
      virtually nothing if Freud's work, I am not qualified to debate on
      that subject.

      Regards,
      Louise

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Albert" <al_d@...> wrote:
      >
      > Louise
      >
      > You shrug me off with little regard. I do apologise for not loving
      and reading all SK's works. It seems to me you have much respect for
      SK as I have much respect for Freud. However, they both have, so far
      as my limited research might go, to have the same arguments. And I
      am saying that these arguments in regard to the existence of God are
      bias and feeble, and yes, they do more than imply the non-existence
      of God.
      >
      > But your not so subtle attempt not to debate with me is accepted.
      >
      > Albert.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: louise
      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 6:41 PM
      > Subject: [existlist] Re: flockless
      >
      >
      > [Albert]
      > Might there be a better argument out there than pop-psycho
      criticism
      > of the believer that God does not exist ?
      >
      > Louise
      > Are you implying that SK asserts the non-existence of God?? It
      would
      > be rather important, in that case, we clarify and argue over the
      > concepts of existence, essence, transcendence, etc. Personally,
      > though, I believe his pseudonymous works and his journals do not
      leave
      > us with any such arid discussion, and I feel little qualified,
      myself,
      > to engage at an abstract level, especially if you have not read
      and
      > loved his works. He writes about human existence, suffering,
      grief,
      > love, art, labour, consolation, motherhood, innocence, social
      > compromise, you name it.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining
      nothing!
      >
      > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist
      >
      >
      >
      > -------------------------------------------------------------------
      -----------
      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      > a.. Visit your group "existlist" on the web.
      >
      > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
      of Service.
      >
      >
      > -------------------------------------------------------------------
      -----------
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > -------------------------------------------------------------------
      -----------
      >
      >
      > No virus found in this incoming message.
      > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
      > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.0/248 - Release Date:
      2/1/2006
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >






      Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

      Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist



      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

      a.. Visit your group "existlist" on the web.

      b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------




      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------


      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG Free Edition.
      Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.0/248 - Release Date: 2/1/2006


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • louise
      ... though I doubt you meant it in the way I like to think of it. You are the most passive aggressive person I have ever met ! ... SK and that therefore the
      Message 2 of 8 , Feb 2, 2006
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Albert" <al_d@...> wrote:
        >
        > Louise
        >
        > I might well be narcissistic, this is in my mind a healthy thing,
        though I doubt you meant it in the way I like to think of it. You
        are the most passive aggressive person I have ever met !
        >
        > You shrugged me off essentially by telling me that I did not know
        SK and that therefore the matter was not worth discussing to you.
        >
        > All I want is a reasonable argument. For example, I think it was
        Plato who said "...order implies a creator...". This statement
        supports the hypothesis that God exists. SK criticising the believer
        does not support the hypothesis that God does not exist. My
        criticism of SK, is that he is actually trying to prove to his
        reader that God does not exist by criticising the believer in this
        way. This is what I meant by "pop-psychology criticism".
        >
        > Now before we go any further, I do not actually support any of
        these two hypotheses, I am merely asking you, an avid reader of SK,
        to defend him with an argument that does actually support the idea
        that God does not exist.
        >
        > Even kinder regards
        > Albert


        Albert,

        First of all, as someone embroiled at present in the variously
        sympathetic and scary meshes of the British judicial and psychiatric
        systems, your description of me as passive-aggressive, though not
        offensive, reads to one of my persuasion as a political statement.
        If I expanded on my theories - which would take too long, anyway - I
        don't really expect you would be convinced. In any case, Susan
        (currently acting as moderator), whilst tolerant of the complexities
        of this intellective bind I'm in, would prefer psychiatric matters
        to be discussed elsewhere. My first Yahoo group, to this day a
        welcome haven to me, welcomes anyone genuinely interested in what
        the mental medics call schizophrenia. An e-mail to my own address,
        and I should be happy to direct you there. Actually, my own [self-]
        diagnosis these days would be manic-depressive, but I distrust
        labels in general. I love narcissism, to be open with you, and wish
        only for the liberty to express my own. Well, that 'only' is
        probably misleading. It is my commitment to paradox and dialectic
        which gives the impression of belligerence (in my opinion).
        Your second paragraph is untrue, and I explained my meaning in my
        reply to you, and apologised!
        What do you mean by 'SK criticising the believer'?? He only
        criticises the hypocrisy and complacency of those who claim belief
        in the Creator he passionately loves, a committed love without
        illusion (within the given parameters). The apostle Paul, for
        instance, described himself and other converts as 'the offscourings
        of the earth'. He expected persecution, resisted lawfully, and
        fought the good fight.
        Anyway, all this explanation is intended to clear the way for
        existential debate. To discuss faith itself is off-topic, so far as
        I understand the moderators' interpretation of the rules.

        Regards,
        Louise
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.