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

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

Expand Messages
  • a_living_breathing_being
    Herman wrote: Yes, the what that is there in the question of Being, is all about the who that asks that very question, the who that cares, intimately about
    Message 1 of 34 , Sep 5, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Herman wrote: Yes, the what that is there in the question of Being,
      is all about the who that asks that very question, the who that cares,
      intimately about the question.

      ALBB: Heidegger wrote about 'care'.

      Herman wrote: This is unscientific. It is radically, and
      existentially, a teleological standpoint.

      ALBB: It seems to be contrasted against a naturalism that portrays
      concrete existence (nature) as having no inherent purpose or final
      cause to it. So how does entelecheia relate to the prevailing
      conservative science that leaves us with the impression that the
      universe has no ultimate purpose within itself? The natural elements
      seem to be in the process of 'becoming' or is actualizing itself as it
      progresses along. I mean, everything that has sprang out of the big
      bang; the enourmous complexity, seems very much like an 'intrisically
      specifying organizing force'; even though 14 billion years has passed,
      somehow reality (as slowly as it moves) has determined itself and is
      co-ordinated with such detail; I'm thinking about the complexity of a
      single human cell, our DNA. I am wondering how we explain the fact of
      complexity and especially complex order; since this keeps me thinking
      that there-is an inherent purpose or final cause for all things that
      exist.

      Herman wrote: It is the Entelecheia that Being always IS, and its
      orientation is the future.

      ALBB: Right. And why is there a future at all; why not nothing? Why
      not an existential wasteland without space or time? a pure suspended
      state of nothing. Time is a 'something'. The future is always
      arriving, being what it is, and is incomprehensible. I am left in a
      state of mystification. Perhaps we should not ask 'why', mayby that
      is the problem.

      Herman wrote" > To gar auto noein estin te kai einai.

      ALBB: I am wondering too if 'thinking' is not the only thing we do;
      [dasein / there-is] feel-ing, eat-ing, sleep-ing, have-ing, fart-ing,
      drink-ing and a myriad of other variations of do-ing that could be
      thought of as 'the same' as 'be-ing'; is there a need to prefer the
      cogitos over any other aspect of human behavior?
    • louise
      ... ing ... ing, & ... the ... Collider ... not ... than ... as such ... Spirituality ... out ... sense ... each ... interpretive skills ... science ... given
      Message 34 of 34 , Sep 8, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- 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-
        ing
        > >
        > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "chris lofting" <lofting@>
        wrote:
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > > -----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
        the
        > > > > > 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
        Collider
        > > > > attempt to create their mini black hole?:)
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > > ;-) it is a problem isn't it! forgive them ... for they know
        not
        > > 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
        than
        > 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.
        Spirituality
        > comes as a property of being a social species and so elements of the
        > parallel when compared to the serial - the organic position brings
        out
        > properties of symmetry and so a sense of 'all is connected'. This
        sense
        > serves to integrate be it between members of the species or within
        each
        > 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
        science
        > research - an example of this form of 'mis-guided' interpretation
        given by
        > a Rabbi describing 'angels' when the dynamics covered is more the
        neurology
        > responding to the push of context on instincts/habits and
        consciousness
        > having no idea what is going on -- see
        > http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/angels.html
        >
        > Chris
        >

        Chris,

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

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