One of my sons was quite excited about "Ishmael" several years ago but I did not read it. Thanks for the reminder. Currently, I am re-reading Virginia Woolf- the ones at hand- and started with "Mrs.Dalloway"- there are four or five more books to go. Might be a somber winter! lol
I think my left brain has a loose screw though I was a good student and am considered intelligent. I think I can trace the cause(s) back to childhood and youth. This "disability" has caused more trouble than with philosophy and abstracts. I had no problem with things like Chaucer's Middle English or Milton's brocade of tropes nor remembering prices or being extremely practical (and lucky) but overall it has been a battle to deal with plans or nebulous topics...so I don't. :-) Actually, my right brain has some problem areas also- I struggle with perspective though that may be partially because I am self-taught in art and its relatives- though that's on a ground- while my home reflects order and excellent housewiffery; also I debate which sizes for cooking and storing food- to big? too small? just right? Who knew that doubling egg custard would work in that small casserole? It did! Anyway- I did love geometry but gave up on math at algebra because in those days girls could avoid math and were considered more feminine- yet some needlework is nothing more than math. And so is music, in a sense. Or working out a formal poem. Etc. I find few philosophers exciting to read- though I liked Nietzche and Bertrand Russell. Which gets back to my preference for reading philosophical topics second-hand, so to speak in literature and expressed in other arts or even watching logical consequences unfold in real life/lives. Maybe that is a poor-man's path. On Dec 6, 6:18 pm, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > A very enjoyable book (IMO) that gets this point across is Ishmael by > Daniel Quinn. In it he uses the art of storytelling as the narrator, in > the actors, and the content (our distant ancestors, "Storytelling gene", > evolution, etc) of the book. It is proof positive that drama and > storytelling is superior, has been with us since before 'we' were 'us' > and played a pivotal role in our survival as a species. > > I would argue that the 'lens' dimension of the mind (a mental discipline > rather) implements the very same functions to generate and examine > philosophies and theories. The beauty of philosophy is differentiation > and refinement, and the beauty of the other is that it requires neither > and can effortlessly project timeless concepts and experiences. > > On 12/6/2010 8:20 AM, rigsy03 wrote: > > > > > There is no way to verify your claim. > > > Why does every generation think it has "invented the wheel"? Perhaps > > it is a form of rebellion and a casting off of the elders. > > > From my readings in literature and history, I feel I could have been > > happily engaged in many different eras. Humans have changed very > > little over time while our concept of god has adapted to superficials > > in human society. > > > Philosophy and theology are hard reads for me- either they make me > > sleepy or confused- mostly in the way they have been expressed. On the > > other hand, Greek drama, literature and the arts present an easier > > grasp of man's struggles with mortality and seem as valid to me as the > > pursuit of philosophy and other theoretical systems. > > > On Dec 6, 6:05 am, RP Singh<[email protected]> wrote: > >> Why think of time in any sense at all , but doesn't it seem reasonable to > >> believe that there have always been universes and life and death will > >> continue in infinity whereas it is accepted that this universe began and > >> will end. My point is that like God Creation with a chain of universes will > >> continue in eternity. > > >> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Ash<[email protected]> wrote: > >>> RP I don't think that time exists in a substantial sense, except to > >>> explain sequences of events or provide reference states/events. From what > >>> we > >>> do know of it, if I am correct, time is relative, and I am beginning to > >>> think of it similarly to gravity. In my view the present can and the past > >>> has been affected by the future. Through this I accept causality but deny > >>> determinism. > >>> Now why cloak explanation in very human terms like happiness and > >>> loneliness? What is pleasurable and painful to this trans-being? This > >>> implies to me a changeful One, not eternal and omnipotent in the linear > >>> senses usually attributed. But something alive, with living parts which > >>> have > >>> an impact on the whole. Sorry if I am putting words in your mouth, care to > >>> clarify more? > >>> On 12/5/2010 11:14 PM, RP Singh wrote: > >>> Ash my meaning is that God finds his happiness in his creation and > >>> therefore , though universes have a beginning and an end , Creation has no > >>> beginning and no end as there would always be universes before and after > >>> the > >>> present universes. In other words there would be no beginning or end of > >>> time. > >>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 5:25 AM, Ash<[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> This leads us to the question of the existence of our universe at all, > >>>> if > >>>> a being existed: omnipresent, omniscient, eternal; what point would > >>>> there be > >>>> to creating our universe? > >>>> On 12/5/2010 12:12 PM, RP Singh wrote: > >>>> Francis , if creation were to have a beginning and an end the eternity of > >>>> God would have no meaning as it is in creation that God's presence is > >>>> felt. > >>>> God would have become a very lonely fellow. > >>>> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:08 PM, frantheman<[email protected] > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> RP, I've asked the question before and I'll ask it again: > >>>>> Who sez? > >>>>> Any of us can make pronouncements ... about anything. The trick is to > >>>>> back them up. > >>>>> Francis > >>>>> On 5 Dez., 16:09, RP<[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> There is no beginning or end of God. He is eternal. There is no > >>>>>> beginning or end of creation. Before this universe there were other > >>>>>> universes and after this universe there will be other universes. In > >>>>>> fact there is no point in time when there was a first universe or > >>>>>> there will be a last universe. God and Creation are both eternal , it > >>>>>> is us beings that are finite.- Hide quoted text - > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
