Attention: Starting December 14, 2019 Yahoo Groups will no longer host user created content on its sites. New content can no longer be uploaded after October 28, 2019. Sending/Receiving email functionality is not going away, you can continue to communicate via any email client with your group members. Learn More
- Nov 24, 2018John and Will,What is missing from this discourse is the GOAL of Evolution's quest for complexity. How complex can it possibly become? Can it become as complex as God the Creator?Will mentions Jimi Hendrix -- and finally -- here is a GOAL that we can talk about, starting with his imagery on Axis -- Bold as Love (1967). It is the Hindu imagery of Mahavishnu -- the Soul's Journey Back to the Godhead.The GOAL of Evolution is -- according to Hegel -- already known to Speculative Philosophy -- it is God's own Self-Return. Hegel says:"God exists, but also exists as the Other, asSelf-differentiating, so that this Other is actually God,having implicitly the Divine Nature in it, and that thesublation of this Difference, this Otherness, and theReturn of Love, are Geist." (Hegel, LPR 1, p. 327)There Hegel implies the Return of the Other back to Godhead, back to Divine Love. This, in terms of Evolution, is the Return of Blind Nature instinctively struggling to Return to God. Hegel also says, more explicitly:"It is in these three forms that the Divine Ideaexplicates itself. Spirit is the Divine History, theprocess of Self-differentiation, of Self-diremptionand Return into Self." (Hegel, LPR 3, p. 187).There Hegel explicitly outlines the Dialectical movement of Creation -- Life -- and thus Evolution -- a process that takes millions of years to accomplish. In my reading, Hegel the Christian would have had no problem at all with Darwin's theory of Natural Selection.Further, it is fruitless to imagine that the "fecundity of the Earth" was responsible for Creation, in order to eliminate the "Intelligent Design" aspect of Creation. The intelligence in the Design of Creation is obvious to the casual observer (when objective). It is as fruitless to rely on the word "fecundity" as it is to rely on the word "emergence" to explain Evolution.The truth of Evolution is detailed in Darwin -- but it is Cosmically explicated by Boehme, Hegel and Speculative Philosophy in general. The GOAL of Evolution is really known from the start -- and thus the Design was implicit from the start. The GOAL of Evolution -- the absolute end-point of all the complexity -- the highest possible consciousness -- is God only God the Creator.Hegel says:"The object of Religion, like that of Philosophy,is Eternal Truth, God and nothing but God andthe explication of God. Philosophy is onlyexplicating *itself* when it explicates Religion, andwhen it explicates itself it is explicating Religion."(Hegel, LPR 1, p. 79)I have shared that quotation from Hegel at least a dozen times on this Hegel List in as many years. Yet, this is the first time I've used this quotation in the context of Evolution and a praise of Charles Darwin.All best,--Paul-------------------------------------------------On Saturday, November 24, 2018, 9:08:56 AM CST, eupraxis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:John,Sure, so rather than attempting to comprehend transitional species and their transmutation (I know you love that term!), we should just accept Aristotle's notion of fixed species and use the Bible, that famous inerrant authority, to explain it all away. Good one.Particles pinging around the Void. Can't have that! Rather, let's believe in a cosmic cartoon character from a jumble of a text with no scientific value whatsoever.Some 4.5 billion years ago, the earth, littered with organic compounds, got all wet and warm and, like an old orange in the back of your fridge, went bad. Then came Hegel, and Dali, and Jimi Hendrix. Blessed be.And, btw, I intimated that you are a Creationist, which you are, not an ID-ist.Best,Will
-----Original Message-----
From: John Bardis jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Nov 24, 2018 9:48 am
Subject: Re: [hegel] perceptionYou mean, Will, that I also believe in intelligent design? Not really. The Bible says:And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.And:And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping things, and the beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.So there isn't much intelligent design here. The idea is, mainly, that the earth is in itself very fertile. It simply needed the word of God to bring forth all kinds of things.This, actually, is similar to Winfield's account following Hegel. The first two parts of Hegel's philosophy of nature are Mechanics and Physical Process. As Winfield explains very well, this is in opposition to the mechanical view of the world, where there are particles bouncing around in the void as the basis of all explanation.So Aristotle's philosophy was THE philosophy of nature until Newton. Newton's mechanics was the first of the modern sciences to be fully developed. This led to the quite obnoxious mechanical understanding of nature.The mechanical understanding of nature began to come unraveled at the end of the 18th century. At this time there took place the beginnings of modern chemistry and the beginnings of our knowledge of electricity. Also at this time Kant reformulated the mechanical view of nature in terms of opposed forces rather than in terms of particles in a void.So, then, after the Mechanics first part, the second part of Hegel's Philosophy of Nature deals with physical processes of the earth. This all begins, first, with light! then with the four elements in their transformations, then magnetism, then electricity, and finally chemistry. So Hegel, and Winfield following him, has developed an idea of the earth as a fertile place where the "emergence" of life is possible.But this "emergence" for Winfield is like an immaculate conception. The fertile earth brings forth life without being first impregnated with the word. It is like a chicken without the help of a rooster, laying eggs.John-----Original Message-----
From: eupraxis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wed, Nov 21, 2018 5:13 pm
Subject: Re: [hegel] perception
Ta-dum! As I said.Will
-----Original Message-----
From: John Bardis jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wed, Nov 21, 2018 1:56 pm
Subject: Re: [hegel] perception
...In regard to my criticism of Winfield, I said nothing about either Geist or intelligent design.My complaint was that he used the words "evolution" and "emergence" as magic words. How did life come to be on earth? It emerged! How did life develop into more complex forms, eventually arriving at man? It was Evolution!So this isn't lazy thinking. This is just no thinking at all. Or even worse, it is just reciting the dogmas that all "right-thinking" people must subscribe to--or they will be mindlessly attacked by the thought-police.And, further, neither evolution nor emergence, to any great extent, has anything to do with Aristotle, Kant or Hegel. There is a certain evolution in both Aristotle and Hegel. But one would have to develop their thoughts on the matter. One can't just simply substitute modern dogmas for actual thought.You mention "a long and arduous time". The fossil record rejects this dogma that you recite. Species more often suddenly "emerge". But why? How? Perhaps Aristotle and Hegel could suggest answers to those questions.And certainly in neither case would the answers have anything to do with intelligent design. Although Geist or the unmoved mover might come into it.But we are not allowed to think about these things. We are not allowed to seriously read Aristotle or Hegel. If we even consider doing so, we will be attacked by ignorant, thoughtless people.John - << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>