Dear Stephen
You may be right, but it is outside my expertise and I have enjoyed very much
what you have delivered on this subject so far. I can only encourage you to
continue your study and feed us the piece of your insight. I am not primarily a
Peircean scholar but a transdisciplinarian philosopher of science using Peirce
to make sense of or to produce a possible underlying unit of the natural,
technical, life, social and human sciences and how to place that into a
metaphysics that makes new sense for the human condition without falling into
scientism on one site and pure constructivism on the other and renew a
platform from where to search for meaning, truth, goodness and beauty. Here I
find Nicolescu’s work very inspiring and I know he is inspired also by Peirce.
I think his formulations avoid the dubious interpretations of the concept of
spirituality.
Cheers
Søren
Fra: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] På vegne af Steven
Ericsson-Zenith
Sendt: 2. juni 2014 21:15
Til: Søren Brier
Cc: Stephen C. Rose; Steven Ericsson-Zenith; [email protected]
Emne: Re: [PEIRCE-L] De Waal seminar chapter 9, section on God, science and
religion: text 1
Dear Soren,
If the question is how can we make any kind of sense of the human condition,
which is what I take you to refer to when you speak of "spirituality" then I
believe that we must put Charles aside and focus instead upon the efforts of
others, including his father and brother (Royce and James, etc..).
Steven
On Monday, June 2, 2014, Søren Brier <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Dear Stev(ph)en and list
About the meaning of spirituality. I am presently reading Basarab Nicolescu
(2014): From modernity to Cosmodernity: Science, Culture and Spirituality
On p. 13 here expressed the transcultural experience of reality in a very
eloquent way, that I find very close to Peirce pure Zero or Tohu va Bohu and
Nargajuna’s emptiness from which all things co-arise:
“The perception of the transcultural is, first of all, an experience, because
it concerns the silence of different actualizations. The space between the
levels of reality is the space of this silence. It is the equivalent, in
interior space, of what is called the quantum vacuum in exterior space. It is a
full silence, structured in levels. There are as many levels of silences as
there are correlations between levels of perception and levels of reality. And
beyond all these levels of silence, there is another quality of silence, that
place-without-place that the poet Michel Casmus calls “our luminous ignorance”.
This nucleus of silence appears to us as an unknowable because it is the
unfathomable well of knowledge, but this unknowable is luminous because it
illuminates the very structure of knowledge. The levels of silence and the
levels of our luminous ignorance determine our lucidity.”
Best
Søren
Fra: Stephen C. Rose
[mailto:[email protected]<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>]
Sendt: 1. juni 2014 20:16
Til: Steven Ericsson-Zenith
Cc:
[email protected]<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
Emne: Re: [PEIRCE-L] De Waal seminar chapter 9, section on God, science and
religion: text 1
Steven - Hope your hospital stay has good results.
It's funny to think of my resonance with Peirce in light of the fact of my
seminary training and lifelong work as both a representative and critic of the
church. I see little or no distinction between Peirce's thinking as a whole and
his thinking that explicitly relates to theology and religion. To make this
distinction sets him up for the charges you levy. I am not sure on what basis
your general observations on the relative spiritualities within the Peirce
family rest, but I tend to take them as less than substantiated by evidence. I
could be wrong. But I have studies some in the areas of American and English
universalism and its morphing into the less interesting (to me) and more
predictable unitarianism. I think CSP may have more affinity with the earliest
universalists and that these have some odd but not insignificant ties to some
views of the late Karl Barth and even to Paul. CSP reserves great acidity for
what he regards as a failing of John, the assumed author of the Fourth Gospel,
and perhaps also of the Book of Revelation. I think Peirce is foundational in
any discussion of holism, moving past Snow, and getting to some understanding
of Christianity past the fundamentalist culture religion that has largely
supplanted both neo-orthodoxy and liberalism. Best, S
@stephencrose<https://twitter.com/stephencrose>
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Steven Ericsson-Zenith
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dear Soren,
My apologizes for the delayed response (I am hospitalized currently). My
comment deserves clarification as Soren suggests.
In brief, Charles' really should not be considered seriously with respect to
social religion and his relationship with formal religion except through his
Neglected Agument (yet another advocacy of his semiotic). God certainly is not
something he "worships" in any traditional sense and his advocacy of "worship"
is not at all religious ( but painfully manipulative and social). His father
and brother are different and more holistic in this regard. If there is a
commonreligious thread between them it is positivism. But Charles, in my view,
should be dismissed.
At some point Stanford will make my January talk on this subject available.
Steven
On Saturday, May 31, 2014, Søren Brier <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Dear Steven
It is obvious not so to me. So, would you care to explain us why you think so?
That would be an interesting contribution to our discussion. I have long felt
that although we in many ways were on the same track, there were also some deep
disagreement on basic interpretations. But I have not been able to put my
finger on it. Maybe you can?
Cheers
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
