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

Re: [Kierkegaardian] EX-ism

Expand Messages
  • Jonathan Glenn
    Ron said: I don t have much respect for Sartre s thought (except for his statement that people are Hell, that is L autre ) but I do enjoy Kierkegaard and
    Message 1 of 4 , Dec 12, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Ron said:

      I don't have much respect for Sartre's thought (except for his statement that people are Hell, that is "L'autre") but I do enjoy Kierkegaard and Camus.
      What are you reading that has you thinking about EX.? Have you read any of Edith Stein? I have always been partial to the writings of people who have died for thought-crimes.


      Ron, I have to confess I don't know Edith Stein's life or works. I haven't been reading anything that has me "thinking about EX" per se; although I have been reading the essays and occasional pieces by Camus which are collected in "Resistance, Rebellion and Death" (btw, a poor choice of title for this collection!), which I very highly recommend. I read "The Unbeliever and Christians" at least once a year. It is so stirring.

      What I have been thinking a lot about, since 911 and its aftermath, is the nature of religious truth claims, particularly claims of authority, for which I have developed a thorough mistrust. And I have been examining the grounds of my own faith, and finding them to be chiefly existential in nature (as opp. to "rational", in the strict sense). Which, of course, will lead one 'round to our Danish friend! I have moved far from the apologetics-based "faith" (if indeed that's what it was) of my younger days.

      Another thought, albeit off-topic (who cares?) I don't follow your application of a zen outlook to the works of the Desert Fathers (with which I am fairly familiar) or to the Kabbalah (with which I am unfamiliar and can only drop the name!). Care to elaborate?

      Big Peace,

      JG




      ---------------------------------
      Do you Yahoo!?
      New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • roncriss
      First I would like to suggest that we make a distinction. We have two Ron s here, Ronald K. and Ron C. (the Moderator). For the sake of clarity I suggest we
      Message 2 of 4 , Dec 12, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        First I would like to suggest that we make a distinction. We have
        two "Ron's" here, Ronald K. and Ron C. (the Moderator). For the sake
        of clarity I suggest we append the initial in future signatures.

        I suspect this message was aimed at Ronald K, but I'm going to jump
        in and reply to parts of it myself.

        --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, Jonathan Glenn <jhgmail@y...>
        wrote:
        > What I have been thinking a lot about, since 911 and its aftermath,
        is the nature of religious truth claims, particularly claims of
        authority, for which I have developed a thorough mistrust. And I have
        been examining the grounds of my own faith, and finding them to be
        chiefly existential in nature (as opp. to "rational", in the strict
        sense). Which, of course, will lead one 'round to our Danish friend!
        I have moved far from the apologetics-based "faith" (if indeed that's
        what it was) of my younger days.

        Existentialism is a very vague and hard to define term. Here is one
        definition:

        "The term existentialism was first used after World War II by the
        French philosopher Gabriel Marcel, but it is generally agreed that
        the Danish theologian and philosopher Soren Kierkegaard is the first
        person for whose system of thought the word properly applies."

        "Existential philosophy is more a trend or attitude than it is
        coherent school or movement because it is intensely subjective. As a
        result, existentialist thinkers tend to vary greatly in their
        concerns and ultimate conclusions. In general, existentialism
        emphasizes the uniqueness and isolation of individual experience in a
        hostile or indifferent universe while denying any special or unique
        essence that humans might have. Human existence is considered
        ultimately unexplainable, but existentialism also stresses freedom of
        choice and responsibility for the consequences of one's acts."

        "Jean-Paul Sartre's famous comment "existence precedes essence" helps
        explain this aspect of existentialism. What he meant by this phrase
        is that humans have no fixed, unchanging essence which makes them
        human. Instead, your essence - what makes you you - is created by
        your existence. Your existence, in turn, is determined by your
        choices. Thus, the responsibility for who you are lies with you."

        The word "existential" is defined as:

        1. Of, relating to, or dealing with existence.
        2. Based on experience; empirical.
        3. Of or as conceived by existentialism or existentialists: an
        existential moment of choice.

        Walter Kaufmann defines Existentialism as:

        "The refusal to belong to any school of thought, the repudiation of
        the adequacy of any body of beliefs whatever, and especially of
        systems, and a marked dissatisfaction with traditional philosophy as
        superficial, academic, and remote from life--that is the heart of
        Existentialism."

        Kaufmann also admits that, "Existentialism is not a school of thought
        nor reducible to any sort of tenets."

        I will admit that K (short for Kierkegaard) was dissatisfied with
        traditional philosophy and certain worldly and churchly (specifically
        Lutheren) systems. And is philosophy was based on dealing with
        existence. But he wuld not be opposed to the sytem of Christianity as
        a whole, would assent to Biblical principles. There is even some
        evidence, I believe, that, had he lived in a Catholic country he
        might have been a Catholic. Certainly his ideas on celibacy are
        closer to Catholic thought. So I don't think that K would have
        accepted the "repudiation of the adequacy of any body of beliefs
        whatever".

        So I don't see how K would assent to the loss of "the apologetics-
        based "faith"" or the acceptance of a non-rational faith. Perhaps you
        can explain yourself better?

        >
        > Another thought, albeit off-topic (who cares?) I don't follow your
        application of a zen outlook to the works of the Desert Fathers (with
        which I am fairly familiar) or to the Kabbalah (with which I am
        unfamiliar and can only drop the name!). Care to elaborate?

        Ronald K, I'd like to hear about this "zen outlook to the works of
        the Desert Fathers" as well!

        ~Ron C~
      • Ronald Kershaw
        May I call you my friend? Dear friend, Edith Stein was phenomenoligist Jew (Lady) who converted to the RC Faith in the Lowlands, subsequintly deported (after
        Message 3 of 4 , Dec 16, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          May I call you my friend?
          Dear friend,
          Edith Stein was phenomenoligist Jew (Lady) who converted to the RC Faith in the Lowlands, subsequintly deported (after the local Bishop bad-mouthed the Nazi) and burned at Auschvitz. Controversial with the Israeli's. They she died because the was a Jew. No dought in part true, but the rest of the convent were burned too.
          I would not call the great Camus a died in the wool EX. (short-hand for existentialist). But not surprizingly one of there favorite exponents. He can write an essay with the best of them whereas I for one, can't get through Being and Nothingness and yet I really enjoys his Novels especially the Triogy.
          Zen and EX are very closly related with the difference that Zen is beautiful.
          Yours in Christ Ronald Kershaw.

          Jonathan Glenn <jhgmail@...> wrote:


          Ron said:

          I don't have much respect for Sartre's thought (except for his statement that people are Hell, that is "L'autre") but I do enjoy Kierkegaard and Camus.
          What are you reading that has you thinking about EX.? Have you read any of Edith Stein? I have always been partial to the writings of people who have died for thought-crimes.


          Ron, I have to confess I don't know Edith Stein's life or works. I haven't been reading anything that has me "thinking about EX" per se; although I have been reading the essays and occasional pieces by Camus which are collected in "Resistance, Rebellion and Death" (btw, a poor choice of title for this collection!), which I very highly recommend. I read "The Unbeliever and Christians" at least once a year. It is so stirring.

          What I have been thinking a lot about, since 911 and its aftermath, is the nature of religious truth claims, particularly claims of authority, for which I have developed a thorough mistrust. And I have been examining the grounds of my own faith, and finding them to be chiefly existential in nature (as opp. to "rational", in the strict sense). Which, of course, will lead one 'round to our Danish friend! I have moved far from the apologetics-based "faith" (if indeed that's what it was) of my younger days.

          Another thought, albeit off-topic (who cares?) I don't follow your application of a zen outlook to the works of the Desert Fathers (with which I am fairly familiar) or to the Kabbalah (with which I am unfamiliar and can only drop the name!). Care to elaborate?

          Big Peace,

          JG




          ---------------------------------
          Do you Yahoo!?
          New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


          Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          kierkegaardians-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



          ---------------------------------
          Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Ronald Kershaw
          Gentlemen, Apologies for my last note. On re-reading it I wondered who wrote it, then I realised I must have been drinking when I wrote it ( tis the season ).
          Message 4 of 4 , Dec 31, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Gentlemen,
            Apologies for my last note. On re-reading it I wondered who wrote it, then I realised I must have been drinking when I wrote it ("tis the season"). Happy New year fellas! Ronald Kershaw.

            roncriss <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
            First I would like to suggest that we make a distinction. We have
            two "Ron's" here, Ronald K. and Ron C. (the Moderator). For the sake
            of clarity I suggest we append the initial in future signatures.

            I suspect this message was aimed at Ronald K, but I'm going to jump
            in and reply to parts of it myself.

            --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, Jonathan Glenn <jhgmail@y...>
            wrote:
            > What I have been thinking a lot about, since 911 and its aftermath,
            is the nature of religious truth claims, particularly claims of
            authority, for which I have developed a thorough mistrust. And I have
            been examining the grounds of my own faith, and finding them to be
            chiefly existential in nature (as opp. to "rational", in the strict
            sense). Which, of course, will lead one 'round to our Danish friend!
            I have moved far from the apologetics-based "faith" (if indeed that's
            what it was) of my younger days.

            Existentialism is a very vague and hard to define term. Here is one
            definition:

            "The term existentialism was first used after World War II by the
            French philosopher Gabriel Marcel, but it is generally agreed that
            the Danish theologian and philosopher Soren Kierkegaard is the first
            person for whose system of thought the word properly applies."

            "Existential philosophy is more a trend or attitude than it is
            coherent school or movement because it is intensely subjective. As a
            result, existentialist thinkers tend to vary greatly in their
            concerns and ultimate conclusions. In general, existentialism
            emphasizes the uniqueness and isolation of individual experience in a
            hostile or indifferent universe while denying any special or unique
            essence that humans might have. Human existence is considered
            ultimately unexplainable, but existentialism also stresses freedom of
            choice and responsibility for the consequences of one's acts."

            "Jean-Paul Sartre's famous comment "existence precedes essence" helps
            explain this aspect of existentialism. What he meant by this phrase
            is that humans have no fixed, unchanging essence which makes them
            human. Instead, your essence - what makes you you - is created by
            your existence. Your existence, in turn, is determined by your
            choices. Thus, the responsibility for who you are lies with you."

            The word "existential" is defined as:

            1. Of, relating to, or dealing with existence.
            2. Based on experience; empirical.
            3. Of or as conceived by existentialism or existentialists: an
            existential moment of choice.

            Walter Kaufmann defines Existentialism as:

            "The refusal to belong to any school of thought, the repudiation of
            the adequacy of any body of beliefs whatever, and especially of
            systems, and a marked dissatisfaction with traditional philosophy as
            superficial, academic, and remote from life--that is the heart of
            Existentialism."

            Kaufmann also admits that, "Existentialism is not a school of thought
            nor reducible to any sort of tenets."

            I will admit that K (short for Kierkegaard) was dissatisfied with
            traditional philosophy and certain worldly and churchly (specifically
            Lutheren) systems. And is philosophy was based on dealing with
            existence. But he wuld not be opposed to the sytem of Christianity as
            a whole, would assent to Biblical principles. There is even some
            evidence, I believe, that, had he lived in a Catholic country he
            might have been a Catholic. Certainly his ideas on celibacy are
            closer to Catholic thought. So I don't think that K would have
            accepted the "repudiation of the adequacy of any body of beliefs
            whatever".

            So I don't see how K would assent to the loss of "the apologetics-
            based "faith"" or the acceptance of a non-rational faith. Perhaps you
            can explain yourself better?

            >
            > Another thought, albeit off-topic (who cares?) I don't follow your
            application of a zen outlook to the works of the Desert Fathers (with
            which I am fairly familiar) or to the Kabbalah (with which I am
            unfamiliar and can only drop the name!). Care to elaborate?

            Ronald K, I'd like to hear about this "zen outlook to the works of
            the Desert Fathers" as well!

            ~Ron C~




            Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            kierkegaardians-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



            ---------------------------------
            Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.