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

Concurrence of Be-ing, Think-ing, & Tim-ing

Expand Messages
  • a_living_breathing_being
    To all, dot you suppose that philosophers would prefer greater percision in their efforts to describe be-ing. There is the problem in which words are
    Message 1 of 34 , Aug 30, 2008
      To all, dot you suppose that philosophers would prefer greater
      percision in their efforts to describe be-ing. There is the problem in
      which words are explained by 'other words' and then again, the
      explanatory words are further defined by 'more words'. How did the
      first primitive word ever get defined? There is no such thing as a one-
      word dictionary.
      The richness of the nontechincal language, it's sheer poetic
      satisfaction is what keeps me trying to construct ontological
      descriptions out of ordinary familiar terms. Language and the "Garden
      of Eloquence" allows us to express BEING and oddly enough to become
      even more aware of the Da-sein's diversity of meaning. This
      achievement does not need a strict techincal terminology for its value
      in artistic satisfaction

      The power of language, when pressed to express the subtlety, seems up
      to the task. I am amazed at how revealing a new shade of meaning can
      be, to un-conceal the meaning of Being (which tends to be both
      forgotten and unthought of).

      The metaphors, such as William James "stream of consciousness" and
      Heraclitus simple statements such as "you cannot step in the same river
      twice", can be explicated in a less metaphorical way, perhaps with even
      neuro-scientific venacular; but still, Chris's physical, natural,
      materialistic reductionism probably overlooks some of the strains of
      awareness that only poetic language can render; Chris, please tell me
      if I am wrong on this?

      I have been reflecting on the notion of multi-dimensions that occur
      simultaneously (at the same time) and being & thinking seems to fit
      this description. In the break-down, I found many words that provided
      additional insight into the relationship of being-to-thinking: As it
      turned out, the metaphor of 'a stream' or 'a river' came to mind, which
      express the transitoriness or temporarality of human perception. That
      is, be-ing, think-ing,and tim-ing all seem to be 'flowing by; and
      express the changing dynamic of sensory experience. Even entelechy
      bears this out as a course of action that is in itself transitory, an
      action that is on its way towards some possible end-mark (telos).

      So, in the eventual description, I come to the poetic conclusion that
      be-ing, think-ing and tim-ing run or "flow" together (simultaneously),
      at least within the perceptions of human experience in general; the
      very experience we cannot avoid, which it at the ground of both
      scientific empiricism and artistic subjectivity. Within empiricism, it
      is a rigid experiment (the techincal para-phrastic term for plain
      old 'experience') heighten by methods and high powered technologies.
      For the artist, it is the experience of itself, "the self . . .thinking
      in itself . . . about itself) the experience of being, it's
      subjectivity; immersed in one's own-most relationship to being-a-self
      and being-in-the-world; yet, the aims are entirely different.

      Be-ing, Think-ing & Time-ing coincide, actively 'flow' together, occur
      simultaneously and are inseperable; a combined unity, a singular state
      and the break-down is only an illusory utility. Anyway "think-ing"
      does not and never did have independent existence; is incapable of
      standing alone and is always a dependent quality of total reality and
      concrete existence.
    • louise
      ... ing ... ing, & ... the ... Collider ... not ... than ... as such ... Spirituality ... out ... sense ... each ... interpretive skills ... science ... given
      Message 34 of 34 , Sep 8, 2008
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "chris lofting" <lofting@...> wrote:
        > > -----Original Message-----
        > > From: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > > [mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of louise
        > > Sent: Tuesday, 9 September 2008 5:10 AM
        > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > > Subject: [existlist] Re: Concurrence of Be-ing, Think-ing, & Tim-
        > >
        > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "chris lofting" <lofting@>
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > > -----Original Message-----
        > > > > From: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > [mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Aija Veldre
        > > Beldavs
        > > > > Sent: Monday, 8 September 2008 8:35 PM
        > > > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: Concurrence of Be-ing, Think-
        ing, &
        > > > > Tim-ing
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > > The ontological dynamic is recursive and as such reflects
        > > > > the dynamics
        > > > > > of the chaos game. That reflection demands consideration of
        > > > > > methodology and its properties and methods that can be
        > > > > confused with what is under analysis.
        > > > > > Chris.
        > > > >
        > > > > uh, as one of the science guys on the list, Chris, would
        > > you care to
        > > > > comment on the end of the world possibility this Wed.
        > > > > Sept. 10th when the mad scientists of the Large Hedron
        > > > > attempt to create their mini black hole?:)
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > > ;-) it is a problem isn't it! forgive them ... for they know
        > > what they
        > > > do...?
        > >
        > > Chris,
        > >
        > > It was already obvious from your earlier remarks that you do
        > > not understand the essence of the Christian religion, nor in
        > > this instance do you see the shallowness of the disrespect
        > > revealed by your throwaway comment. Jesus understood what he
        > > meant by saying, they know not what they do, and if he was
        > > merely mortal the point is lost. As far as human frailty
        > > goes, quite often wrongdoers are perfectly aware of what they
        > > are doing, but fail to understand its significance. Of
        > > course. They are not usually philosophers, in the Greek
        > > sense of the term, interested with subjective passion in
        > > their thought. This rather solemn statement is needful,
        > > because it concerns disagreements at the list concerning
        > > Kierkegaard's view of the Christian faith, and is hardly a
        > > trifling matter.
        > >
        > ;-) you should have realised by now that I lean more to Nietzsche
        > Kierkegaard. I find any religious perspective as de-humanising and
        as such
        > agree with Marx re 'opiate of the masses' .. or was it 'people'? ;-)
        > There is a sharp distinction between spirituality vs religion.
        > comes as a property of being a social species and so elements of the
        > parallel when compared to the serial - the organic position brings
        > properties of symmetry and so a sense of 'all is connected'. This
        > serves to integrate be it between members of the species or within
        > member as singular beings. Not understanding these basics allows for
        > mis-interpretations of what is going on to a degree our
        interpretive skills
        > get out of control when not grounded in reality through use of
        > research - an example of this form of 'mis-guided' interpretation
        given by
        > a Rabbi describing 'angels' when the dynamics covered is more the
        > responding to the push of context on instincts/habits and
        > having no idea what is going on -- see
        > http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/angels.html
        > Chris


        It is you who have no idea what is going on. You are a newbie.
        Please try to show a little humility.

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