Welcome to Yahoo Groups.

PM To: hegel@^$3 Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: "God is logic" William S. Sinda, Jr. -----Original Message----- From: Randall Jackwak thejackjam@^$4 [hegel] To: hegel Sent: Fri, Jan 26, 2018 7:06 pm Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: "God is logic" And who are you to tell me what this

hegel@^$3 Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: "God is logic" Is that an Hegelian question? W -----Original Message----- From: Randall Jackwak thejackjam@^$4 [hegel] To: hegel Sent: Fri, Jan 26, 2018 6:52 pm Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: "God is logic" Oh should I leave Will? R From: hegel

Re: "God is logic" Randall, This list isn't for having sport with someone. Will -----Original Message----- From: Randall Jackwak thejackjam@^$4 [hegel] To: hegel Sent: Fri, Jan 26, 2018 6:30 pm Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: "God is logic" Actually, I would like to see what

Re: "God is logic" Randall, This list isn't for having sport with someone. Will -----Original Message----- From: Randall Jackwak thejackjam@^$4 [hegel] To: hegel Sent: Fri, Jan 26, 2018 6:30 pm Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: "God is logic" Actually, I would like to see what

inspired to enter into some discussion (very low probability in this period but maybe) R From: hegel@^$1 on behalf of Randall Jackwak thejackjam@^$2 [hegel] Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 6:17 PM To: hegel@^$3 Subject: Re: [hegel] Re: "God is logic" > Alan made an important

> Alan made an important conceptual distinction of which > he provided a concrete illustration. You completely ignored > what he patiently wrote. Oh Lordy! ._,___

Hi Eric, You'd have to send it to me directly and then autograph it, if you wanted me to read it. But, seriously, I could tolerate a narcissist if there was some kind of pay-off, but I think Kaufmann actually owes me something for reading the crap he has

I'll say that Hollingdale's gave us an excellent translation of Thus Spoke Zarathustra (also Twilight of the Idols) . It was a huge improvement over the Kaufmann version. My paperback of the Hollingdale version brought me to tears every time I read it

could be that the system in its objective totality is a circle divided into 8 parts. R From: hegel@^$1 on behalf of Randall Jackwak thejackjam@^$2 [hegel] Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 11:14 AM To: hegel@^$3 Subject: Re: [hegel] "scientific cognition" > So, once again I ask

> So, once again I ask my question: what is the significance of dividing the Preface > of the Phenomenology into nine moments? What is the significance of this division? He could be talking with Schelling. One of the biggest difference between the early