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

Re: [spinoza-tie] re Imagination etc.

Expand Messages
  • SunHunter9@aol.com
    ... Your lack of specifics, in the sense of presenting any particular sticking points, prevents any dialectic process from occurring. A good deal of what
    Message 1 of 14 , Feb 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 1/31/01 10:12:32 PM, tneff@... writes:

      >Hi SunHunter9,
      >
      >Again, I can barely make anything intelligible out of this "rigorous
      >verbiage."

      Your lack of specifics, in the sense of presenting any particular "sticking
      points," prevents any dialectic process from occurring. A good deal of what
      was contained in my last post, specifically the second paragraph which
      comprises the main body of prose text, is a very brief and incomplete
      explication of Spinoza's ontological conception and a reference to his aim in
      Part 5, which ideas are readily available in reputable texts about Spinoza's
      philosophy. That is not to say that the concepts are not difficult.
      Would-be adherents who cannot yet comprehend, at least logically to a certain
      degree, Spinoza's conception of Substance and the attributes, and his ideas
      about the dual nature of objects, (particularly where their own nature is
      concerned), will encounter corresponding limitations when it comes to
      applying the practical methods for coming to adequate conceptions of their
      modifications.

      >It seems to me that many of the phrases and examples are being
      >used more to produce an impression of depth than to help anyone to
      >understand anything.

      The text portion of my last post which I just discussed etc., was aimed at
      helping the understanding of the topics just mentioned. I made it clear that
      my aim with my poem etc., which comprised the balance of the post was, as you
      say, "to produce an impression of depth." But, do you mean in the sense of
      somehow defrauding the poor reader? If there was a measuring device for
      determining the degree of someone else's "depth" over the net, or even across
      the room, how useful would that be? It might be worth something if we could
      use it to assess or aid our own progress, because that is what is important.
      If you agree, then what is important for you is how <you> feel in responding
      positively or reacting passively to these "depth impressions."

      The best way I know of to share the joy I felt in creating one of my poems,
      or reflecting again on the ideas that inspired it, is to show or read it to
      the other. I cannot show you them idea directly; it isn't a physical object.
      I show them what my idea "looks like" to me by embodying it in the words of
      my poem. How about the possibility that in your recognition of this "depth
      impression," once you separate it from your ideas about me, is a sense of
      "some good," which is in you?

      >In your recent posts, including the essay, it seems
      >to me that many of the comments directed toward me apply as much, or even
      >more
      >directly, to you and what you have written.

      There isn't anything about you, in particular, in my essay.

      >Any emotions must involve my own imagination and confused thinking.

      This is of value. A true proposition.

      > I will continue to read and endeavor to understand anything that anyone
      >writes here however at this point, having reviewed the last several
      >exchanges, I feel there has been nothing of any value to come from either
      >of us.

      I see a good deal of value generally in your interest in Spinoza, especially
      when it is manifested in a clear idea, as in your proposition above. My own
      remarks embody ideas which are of incalculable value to me. However, our
      discussions have not achieved any dialectic process, or synthesis.
    • tneff@earthlink.net
      Hi SunHunter9, The tone of your last post (as I perceive it) seems a little less arrogant to me and that s a positive sign. There is, at this time, nothing
      Message 2 of 14 , Feb 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi SunHunter9,

        The tone of your last post (as I perceive it) seems a little less
        arrogant to me and that's a positive sign.

        There is, at this time, nothing further I can think of to
        contribute to this thread.

        Regards,

        Terry
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.