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

Re: Poking at nothing

Expand Messages
  • Jim
    All, I ve ordered both Holt s book and Krauss s - so hopefully I ll have both sides of the story of nothing before too long. Jim
    Message 1 of 21 , Apr 6, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      All,

      I've ordered both Holt's book and Krauss's - so hopefully I'll have both sides of the story of nothing before too long.

      Jim
    • Mary
      Jim, And it looks that with Holt s book, we ll get more than two sides of each side :) Mary
      Message 2 of 21 , Apr 6, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Jim,

        And it looks that with Holt's book, we'll get more than two sides of each side :)

        Mary

        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
        >
        > All,
        >
        > I've ordered both Holt's book and Krauss's - so hopefully I'll have both sides of the story of nothing before too long.
        >
        > Jim
        >
      • wsindarius
        Jim, all, Apropos the question of Nothing, I recommend Zizek s The Indivisible Remainder, which I am rereading just now. I can also recommend Schelling s late
        Message 3 of 21 , Apr 7, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Jim, all,

          Apropos the question of Nothing, I recommend Zizek's The Indivisible Remainder, which I am rereading just now. I can also recommend Schelling's late works, Of Human Freedom (Philosophische Untersuchungen über das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit ...), and Ages of the World.

          About a year and a half ago, I purchased a nice and rather fat leather journal and a nice Parker fountain pen and began an experiment that is soon to conclude: I began with a question and made this question the more or less single thread of the whole text. I began with Descartes' ontology and brought it through (among other things) Schelling's insight into Void/Desire/Individuation as ontology, Hegel's Logic, Nietzsche's Will-to-Power as Nature, and so on, and began an earnest critique of scientific reductionism as the warp of the religious woof. This has been one long meditation. Quite an experience. In any case, Schelling has haunted much of the writing.

          My esteem for Schelling cannot be exaggerated. The Zizek text tackles Schelling in a surprisingly readable and thought provoking way.


          Just a thought.

          Wil





          -----Original Message-----
          From: Jim <jjimstuart1@...>
          To: existlist <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sat, Apr 6, 2013 5:42 pm
          Subject: [existlist] Re: Poking at nothing





          All,

          I've ordered both Holt's book and Krauss's - so hopefully I'll have both sides of the story of nothing before too long.

          Jim









          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Jim
          Wil, Thanks - that sounds quite a project. My problem is I start off on such projects but tend to get distracted and diverted after a while. However I note the
          Message 4 of 21 , Apr 8, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Wil,

            Thanks - that sounds quite a project. My problem is I start off on such projects but tend to get distracted and diverted after a while.

            However I note the books you refer to. I have never read any Schelling but I guess reading some of his stuff will make Hegel more accessible as Hegel was responding partly to Schelling as his immediate predecessor in the post-Kantian philosophers.

            I agree the Schelling/Hegel/Zizek account of these issues is probably a radical alternative to what Krauss and Holt offer.

            Jim



            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:
            >
            > Jim, all,
            >
            > Apropos the question of Nothing, I recommend Zizek's The Indivisible Remainder, which I am rereading just now. I can also recommend Schelling's late works, Of Human Freedom (Philosophische Untersuchungen über das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit ...), and Ages of the World.
            >
            > About a year and a half ago, I purchased a nice and rather fat leather journal and a nice Parker fountain pen and began an experiment that is soon to conclude: I began with a question and made this question the more or less single thread of the whole text. I began with Descartes' ontology and brought it through (among other things) Schelling's insight into Void/Desire/Individuation as ontology, Hegel's Logic, Nietzsche's Will-to-Power as Nature, and so on, and began an earnest critique of scientific reductionism as the warp of the religious woof. This has been one long meditation. Quite an experience. In any case, Schelling has haunted much of the writing.
            >
            > My esteem for Schelling cannot be exaggerated. The Zizek text tackles Schelling in a surprisingly readable and thought provoking way.
            >
            >
            > Just a thought.
            >
            > Wil
            >
          • wsindarius
            Jim, The trick is to spend far too much on both the journal and the pen. Then one s sense of responsibility takes over. Wil ... From: Jim
            Message 5 of 21 , Apr 8, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Jim,

              The trick is to spend far too much on both the journal and the pen. Then one's sense of responsibility takes over.

              Wil




              -----Original Message-----
              From: Jim <jjimstuart1@...>
              To: existlist <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Mon, Apr 8, 2013 7:05 am
              Subject: [existlist] Re: Poking at nothing





              Wil,

              Thanks - that sounds quite a project. My problem is I start off on such projects but tend to get distracted and diverted after a while.

              However I note the books you refer to. I have never read any Schelling but I guess reading some of his stuff will make Hegel more accessible as Hegel was responding partly to Schelling as his immediate predecessor in the post-Kantian philosophers.

              I agree the Schelling/Hegel/Zizek account of these issues is probably a radical alternative to what Krauss and Holt offer.

              Jim

              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:
              >
              > Jim, all,
              >
              > Apropos the question of Nothing, I recommend Zizek's The Indivisible Remainder, which I am rereading just now. I can also recommend Schelling's late works, Of Human Freedom (Philosophische Untersuchungen über das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit ...), and Ages of the World.
              >
              > About a year and a half ago, I purchased a nice and rather fat leather journal and a nice Parker fountain pen and began an experiment that is soon to conclude: I began with a question and made this question the more or less single thread of the whole text. I began with Descartes' ontology and brought it through (among other things) Schelling's insight into Void/Desire/Individuation as ontology, Hegel's Logic, Nietzsche's Will-to-Power as Nature, and so on, and began an earnest critique of scientific reductionism as the warp of the religious woof. This has been one long meditation. Quite an experience. In any case, Schelling has haunted much of the writing.
              >
              > My esteem for Schelling cannot be exaggerated. The Zizek text tackles Schelling in a surprisingly readable and thought provoking way.
              >
              >
              > Just a thought.
              >
              > Wil
              >









              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Mary
              The Holt book has arrived, and since it seems more relevant to existentialism proper, I ll tackle it first as well as a family matter which demands much of my
              Message 6 of 21 , Apr 8, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                The Holt book has arrived, and since it seems more relevant to existentialism proper, I'll tackle it first as well as a family matter which demands much of my energy. Thank you for your patience.

                Mary

                --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
                >
                > Wil,
                >
                > Thanks - that sounds quite a project. My problem is I start off on such projects but tend to get distracted and diverted after a while.
                >
                > However I note the books you refer to. I have never read any Schelling but I guess reading some of his stuff will make Hegel more accessible as Hegel was responding partly to Schelling as his immediate predecessor in the post-Kantian philosophers.
                >
                > I agree the Schelling/Hegel/Zizek account of these issues is probably a radical alternative to what Krauss and Holt offer.
                >
                > Jim
                >
                >
                >
                > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@ wrote:
                > >
                > > Jim, all,
                > >
                > > Apropos the question of Nothing, I recommend Zizek's The Indivisible Remainder, which I am rereading just now. I can also recommend Schelling's late works, Of Human Freedom (Philosophische Untersuchungen über das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit ...), and Ages of the World.
                > >
                > > About a year and a half ago, I purchased a nice and rather fat leather journal and a nice Parker fountain pen and began an experiment that is soon to conclude: I began with a question and made this question the more or less single thread of the whole text. I began with Descartes' ontology and brought it through (among other things) Schelling's insight into Void/Desire/Individuation as ontology, Hegel's Logic, Nietzsche's Will-to-Power as Nature, and so on, and began an earnest critique of scientific reductionism as the warp of the religious woof. This has been one long meditation. Quite an experience. In any case, Schelling has haunted much of the writing.
                > >
                > > My esteem for Schelling cannot be exaggerated. The Zizek text tackles Schelling in a surprisingly readable and thought provoking way.
                > >
                > >
                > > Just a thought.
                > >
                > > Wil
                > >
                >
              • Mary
                Jim, I m halfway through Holt s book about to begin the Interlude titled Nausea. I m enjoying his brief introduction to the various theories about why there s
                Message 7 of 21 , Apr 16, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  Jim,

                  I'm halfway through Holt's book about to begin the Interlude titled Nausea. I'm enjoying his brief introduction to the various theories about why there's something rather than nothing. Of course it's difficult to accept or reject these without more in-depth attention, except for the god theory; I did give that adequate attention. I need to spend a little time thinking about the how the law of contradiction works, because contradiction, opposition, and negation are all part of his speculative reason.

                  Have you started with Holt's or Krauss' book first, or neither yet? I remember Wil said he read the Krauss book already. Anybody else?

                  Mary

                  --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > All,
                  >
                  > I've ordered both Holt's book and Krauss's - so hopefully I'll have both sides of the story of nothing before too long.
                  >
                  > Jim
                  >
                • eduardathome
                  Is it really important in the grand scheme of things?? I suppose one can always ask the question and theoretical scientists are certainly busy trying to
                  Message 8 of 21 , Apr 16, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Is it really important in the grand scheme of things??

                    I suppose one can always ask the question and theoretical scientists are
                    certainly busy trying to formulating an answer. But isn't this something
                    like asking why there was the car accident I didn't have because I left work
                    early.

                    eduard

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Mary
                    Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 3:35 PM
                    To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [existlist] Re: Poking at nothing (Why Does The World Exist?)

                    Jim,

                    I'm halfway through Holt's book about to begin the Interlude titled Nausea.
                    I'm enjoying his brief introduction to the various theories about why
                    there's something rather than nothing. Of course it's difficult to accept or
                    reject these without more in-depth attention, except for the god theory; I
                    did give that adequate attention. I need to spend a little time thinking
                    about the how the law of contradiction works, because contradiction,
                    opposition, and negation are all part of his speculative reason.

                    Have you started with Holt's or Krauss' book first, or neither yet? I
                    remember Wil said he read the Krauss book already. Anybody else?

                    Mary

                    --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > All,
                    >
                    > I've ordered both Holt's book and Krauss's - so hopefully I'll have both
                    > sides of the story of nothing before too long.
                    >
                    > Jim
                    >




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

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

                    Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
                  • Mary
                    You understand the grand scheme of things so that you can dismiss any questions about it? Mary
                    Message 9 of 21 , Apr 16, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      You understand the grand scheme of things so that you can dismiss any questions about it?

                      Mary

                      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome <yeoman@...> wrote:

                      > Is it really important in the grand scheme of things??
                    • Jim
                      Mary, Good to hear you are well into Holt s book. I have decided to read Krauss s book first as it seems more focussed on the science, so I thought I d try to
                      Message 10 of 21 , Apr 17, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Mary,

                        Good to hear you are well into Holt's book.

                        I have decided to read Krauss's book first as it seems more focussed on the science, so I thought I'd try to understand the new scientific theories about the start of the universe before tackling the philosophical issues which, I guess, get more attention in Holt's book.

                        I am not very far into Krauss's book, so I'll do a few more days reading before venturing to discuss his ideas.

                        Hopefully we can get a good discussion going in a short while.

                        Jim
                      • eduardathome
                        It isn t that I understand the grand scheme of things. I am simply putting the question as to whether a focus on nothingness is of any importance. Its a
                        Message 11 of 21 , Apr 18, 2013
                        • 0 Attachment
                          It isn't that I understand the grand scheme of things. I am simply putting
                          the question as to whether a focus on "nothingness" is of any importance.
                          Its a question.

                          In the next moment in which you decide what you will choose to do, does
                          "nothingness" have any part in that decision. I doubt it.

                          eduard

                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: Mary
                          Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 11:19 PM
                          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: [existlist] Re: Poking at nothing (Why Does The World Exist?)

                          You understand the grand scheme of things so that you can dismiss any
                          questions about it?

                          Mary

                          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome <yeoman@...> wrote:

                          > Is it really important in the grand scheme of things??





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

                          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.