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

requirement for what

Expand Messages
  • Mary
    eduard, Again you are trying to blur the distinction between ordinary choice and authenticity and existentialist choice and authenticity. If you re not
    Message 1 of 2 , Feb 11 12:13 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      eduard,

      Again you are trying to blur the distinction between ordinary choice and authenticity and existentialist choice and authenticity. If you're not interested in doing so, I'll refrain from responding to your comments when they aren't existentialist or philosophical. I'm baffled that when I iterate existentialist concepts you resort to virtually saying, "so what, that's what everyone does." I understand what you say, but I can't fathom why you say it.

      Mary

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
      >
      > [Authenticity is a relationship not only with yourself but with others.}
      >
      > Obviously an authentic act will be with respect others, but how does that
      > qualify whether one is authentic or not??
      >
      > I am not espousing "radical individualism", whatever that is. I am simply
      > stating that when you choose to act, it is an individual's choice. You may
      > take others into consideration when choosing ... and it would be nice to do
      > so ... but it isn't a requirement as to say that you can not choose without
      > considering others.
      >
      > eduard
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Mary
      > Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 6:59 PM
      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [existlist] Re: significant difference
      >
      > But eduard what you've just now espoused is radical individualism, and it
      > conflicts with what wrote you wrote previously: "I am not advocating radical
      > individualism. There are shared ideas and also ideas which may differ
      > between individuals and for which there may be disagreement. In a civilized
      > society we try to deal with our disagreements." I don't understand your
      > concern with the authenticity of evil. What is society except others?
      > Authenticity is a relationship not only with yourself but with others.
      > Together with freedom and responsibility they are existentialist
      > touchstones. Evil matters, but not because it's authentic.
      >
      > Mary
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
      > >
      > > Why??
      > >
      > > Why should we have to consider whether the authentically evil person is
      > > responsible for someone else?? What has the "other" got to do with
      > > anything?? You are authentic if you act as you think or believe. Simple.
      > > Period. If you are inclined to evil and it is in your character, why
      > > should
      > > we have to add the further qualification of whether there is some "other"
      > > in
      > > the mix??
      > >
      > > You are adding all sorts of qualifications without explaining how these
      > > matter.
      > >
      > > eduard
      > >
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: Mary
      > > Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 1:10 PM
      > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > > Subject: [existlist] significant difference
      > >
      > > The existentialist proof for whether someone is acting authentically is
      > > whether they acknowledge intersubjectivity. An authentically evil person
      > > is
      > > responsible for whom? To what is he committed other than acting at the
      > > expense of others' freedom. To attribute the isolated concepts of
      > > authenticity, freedom, and responsibility to an evil person is to ignore
      > > whether these concepts are merged within that person and whether that
      > > person
      > > values them enough to respect them in others.
      > >
      > > Mary
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------
      > >
      > > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!
      > >
      > > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!
      >
      > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
      >
    • eduardathome
      I had to do a copy/paste into Word and do a [ctrl][f] and nowhere here do I say so what, that s what everyone does . What I can t fathom is your tendency of
      Message 2 of 2 , Feb 11 12:51 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        I had to do a copy/paste into Word and do a [ctrl][f] and nowhere here do I
        say "so what, that's what everyone does". What I can't fathom is your
        tendency of attributing statements to me and then arguing against the
        statement rather than actually responding to my questions.

        The question here is ... how does "a relationship not only with yourself,
        but with others" have anything to do with authenticity. Other than the
        obvious one, in that when you act, you are doing so to others.

        I am not trying to blur anything. I simply want an explanation.

        eduard



        -----Original Message-----
        From: Mary
        Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 3:13 PM
        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [existlist] requirement for what

        eduard,

        Again you are trying to blur the distinction between ordinary choice and
        authenticity and existentialist choice and authenticity. If you're not
        interested in doing so, I'll refrain from responding to your comments when
        they aren't existentialist or philosophical. I'm baffled that when I iterate
        existentialist concepts you resort to virtually saying, "so what, that's
        what everyone does." I understand what you say, but I can't fathom why you
        say it.

        Mary

        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
        >
        > [Authenticity is a relationship not only with yourself but with others.}
        >
        > Obviously an authentic act will be with respect others, but how does that
        > qualify whether one is authentic or not??
        >
        > I am not espousing "radical individualism", whatever that is. I am simply
        > stating that when you choose to act, it is an individual's choice. You
        > may
        > take others into consideration when choosing ... and it would be nice to
        > do
        > so ... but it isn't a requirement as to say that you can not choose
        > without
        > considering others.
        >
        > eduard
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Mary
        > Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 6:59 PM
        > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [existlist] Re: significant difference
        >
        > But eduard what you've just now espoused is radical individualism, and it
        > conflicts with what wrote you wrote previously: "I am not advocating
        > radical
        > individualism. There are shared ideas and also ideas which may differ
        > between individuals and for which there may be disagreement. In a
        > civilized
        > society we try to deal with our disagreements." I don't understand your
        > concern with the authenticity of evil. What is society except others?
        > Authenticity is a relationship not only with yourself but with others.
        > Together with freedom and responsibility they are existentialist
        > touchstones. Evil matters, but not because it's authentic.
        >
        > Mary
        >
        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
        > >
        > > Why??
        > >
        > > Why should we have to consider whether the authentically evil person is
        > > responsible for someone else?? What has the "other" got to do with
        > > anything?? You are authentic if you act as you think or believe.
        > > Simple.
        > > Period. If you are inclined to evil and it is in your character, why
        > > should
        > > we have to add the further qualification of whether there is some
        > > "other"
        > > in
        > > the mix??
        > >
        > > You are adding all sorts of qualifications without explaining how these
        > > matter.
        > >
        > > eduard
        > >
        > > -----Original Message-----
        > > From: Mary
        > > Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 1:10 PM
        > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > > Subject: [existlist] significant difference
        > >
        > > The existentialist proof for whether someone is acting authentically is
        > > whether they acknowledge intersubjectivity. An authentically evil person
        > > is
        > > responsible for whom? To what is he committed other than acting at the
        > > expense of others' freedom. To attribute the isolated concepts of
        > > authenticity, freedom, and responsibility to an evil person is to ignore
        > > whether these concepts are merged within that person and whether that
        > > person
        > > values them enough to respect them in others.
        > >
        > > Mary
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ------------------------------------
        > >
        > > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining
        > > nothing!
        > >
        > > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!
        >
        > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
        >




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

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

        Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.