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

Re: Faith vs Experience

Expand Messages
  • pmcvflag
    Hey Guy You sate some of the same things multiple times in the recent group of posts, allow me to answer them all together in one response so that our forum
    Message 1 of 111 , Jan 11, 2008
      Hey Guy

      You sate some of the same things multiple times in the recent group
      of posts, allow me to answer them all together in one response so
      that our forum isn't flooded with our conversation.

      You state in post 13386...

      >>>Are you still playing devil's advocate :-) and testing me if I
      have integrity with what I am writing about?<<<

      You misunderstand my intent, Guy. My purpose in playing "devil's
      advocate" is not to test your integrity. Instead it is a common forum
      method that mods use simply to help foster conversation by raising
      issues about points. If you look back through conversation here you
      will find that I challenge points that are often debated whether I
      agree with them or not... and sometimes I have even challenged my own
      points in this way. Somebody in here once said something that I think
      you will find true of scholars and Gnostics alike "... in a room of
      10 you will get 11 opinions).

      The challenge is also meant to help us all explain ourselves better
      by looking closely things that could foster misunderstanding.

      Now on to your definitions. You state...

      >>>When I use words I like to use them as they are stated in the
      dictionary and the dictionary<<<

      A dictionary is a great tool so far as it goes. Most people have
      something called a "common usage" dictionary. Some people have
      dictionaries that include etymological definitions as well. There may
      even be a few of us here who have articles or technical manuals that
      include academic definitions of the words that come up here. Not all
      dictionaries deal with words in the same way and for the same
      function.

      There is a problem with common usage dictionary definitions though,
      in that they are generally written to give a person who is not
      familiar with a word a basic outline so they can deal with the word
      in a short term setting. If you look up a word like "Existentialism"
      in a common usage dictionary you are not going to get a full outline
      that a practicing Existentialist would agree with. If we asked
      somebody like Jonas, or Heidegger, they would be justified in telling
      us that they can provide a better definition than the dictionary. If
      we are talking about Existentialism in a long term and more indepth
      setting we would have to come to understand the word better than the
      dictionary can outline for us.

      Likewise, this forum is dealing with terms like "Gnosis"
      and "Gnosticism" in a way that is far more indepth and technical than
      you will find it stated in the dictionary. If you look in our links
      section and our files section you will find a lexicon that gives some
      deeper outlines of these terms as they relate to historical
      Gnosticism. It could help.

      More specifically you give this definition ....

      >>>post·mod·ern or post-mod·ern adj. Of or relating to art,
      architecture, or literature that reacts against earlier modernist
      principles, as by reintroducing traditional or classical elements of
      style or by carrying modernist styles or practices to extremes<<<

      You then state...

      >>>As you can see by the dictionary's definition postmodernism is a
      reaction against earlier modernist principles, as by reintroducing
      traditional or classical elements of style or by carrying modernist
      styles or practices to extremes. I carry modernistic practice of the
      scientific method to the extreme as well as reacting against blind
      faith.<<<

      If we take a closer look at the definition you gave it makes a point
      that I made previously as well, which is that it is dealing with a
      reaction to the "Modernist" movement in ART and LITERATURE.... not a
      worldview. Since I did not recall you mentioning artistic movements
      in your previous post I am sure you can forgive my misunderstanding
      of your intent as being completely reasonable. Modernism in art is
      not the same as the modern period of scientific rationalism. This is
      why I assumed you must be talking about the other common meaning of
      the term "Postmodernism", which refers to a philosophical movement
      that grew out of Existentialism. The two usages of the term are
      unrelated.

      Having explained my misunderstanding of your intent (and perhaps some
      misunderstanding on your part about what the dictionary is actually
      saying there), I believe I understand what you meant now. This makes
      much more sense, so thank you for taking the time to make your intent
      clear.

      There is one last thing you stated that perhaps you can explain
      further....

      >>>I am only concerned with the Gnostic final goal of spiritual
      liberation.<<<

      Just as you agreed that there is "gnosis" and there is "Gnosis"...
      there is also "gnostic" and there is "Gnostic". Previously you stated
      you were talking about "gnosis" with the small "g", so I am wondering
      if in this case you actually meant "gnostic" with a small "g"? (just
      a question) After all, the "gnostic" seeks "gnosis", while
      the "Gnostic" seeks "Gnosis". The "Gnostic" notion of spiritual
      liberation is not in all cases the same as the "gnostic" notion of
      spiritual liberation. I have been doing this for many many years now,
      and I think you would be shocked to hear what some "gnostics"
      think "gnosis" is. I think if you had heard them you may understand
      why I am being so careful with the words here, and trying to be sure
      I understand what you mean.

      PMCV
    • Michael Leavitt
      SORRY. :)
      Message 111 of 111 , Jan 16, 2008
        SORRY. :)

        pmcvflag wrote:
        > Michael...
        >
        >
        >>>> Seemed like all your other posts to me. :)<<<
        >>>>
        >
        > Doh! Just because you are right doesn't mean you are not a pain in the
        > ass! *lol*. If you can let a guy PRETEND his spelling is not ALWAYS
        > bad you let him keep his dignity.... if just a little. You know...
        > just for the sake of Chivalry. ;)
        >
        > PMCV
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.