"mystery" is too comprehensible.
I wonder if logic is reducible to an intense grammar.
"God" has lots of meaning, just not metaphysical. I think this is why Heidegger called Nietzsche the culmination of Christian Metaphysics, and its necessary end. I too think of Nietzsche as a sort of hyper-christian, and myself too.
I am seeking the ...( 1 year ago by radiofriendly)
I am seeking the truth, O Father; I am not affirming it. O my God, direct and rule me.
...Who can say that there is only time present because the other two do not exist? Or do they also exist; but when, from the future, time becomes present, it proceeds from some secret place; and when, from times present, it becomes past, it recedes into some secret place? For where have those men who have foretold the future seen the things foretold, if then they were not yet existing?
I can't find the ...( 1 year ago by radiofriendly)
I can't find the Augustine quote I'm thinking of - from a sermon - i have it in a book somewhere? talks about the sound of words and time...
watching it again i ...( 1 year ago by atheologica)
watching it again i was thinking how many theological writers and philosophers were influenced by Nietzsche the atheist. I think it makes sense that God as metaphysical has lost meaning, but perhaps there is a rebirth of "God" in Ontology...I have to read Buber. Shestov, Levinas, and Marion are good too...they talk about this.
"What then is time? ...( 1 year ago by redliterocket4)
"What then is time? If no one asks me, I know what it is. If I wish to explain it to him who asks, I do not know." that the one you're talking about?
I'm not sure. ...( 1 year ago by radiofriendly)
I'm not sure. Augustine... he's a winner.
If God is the ...( 1 year ago by MarlboroMan4056)
If God is the infinite, the all, language is limited and cannot fully explain god. The now is a constant moment, and in it contains infinity. I like to say that God is the wordless Word. A word = idea = image of experience. experience = reality (ie a broken leg hurts vs I have a broken leg and it hurts!)
I think another ...( 1 year ago by stmichael71)
I think another interesting place for God in philosophy would be the rediscovery of Thomistic metaphysics under the modern analytics and in phenomenological study. Stein, Anscombe, Haldane, Maritain, Gilson, Wippel, Sokolowski, all come to mind.
There is no ...( 1 year ago by atheologica)
There is no metaphysics. Metaphysics is a failed attempt of routing out ontology. I'm familiar with Aristotle's views, but then Aristotle neglected Ontology by being a metaphysician.
Your terms are ...( 1 year ago by stmichael71)
Your terms are incoherent. Ontology is the same word used in modern thought to refer to "metaphysics." And if you think metaphysics impossible, go read Heideggar.
I've read Heidegger ...( 1 year ago by atheologica)
I've read Heidegger, and I've read his critique of Nietzsche's words that being is but a whisp or vapor of reality.
I take a lot from Heidegger, but not his claim that metaphysics is just left empty and never really gone. Of logical necessity, to which metaphysics and not ontology can apply, there is no need for metaphysics itself.
it is staunchly un-heideggerian of you to say these two words mean the same thing and refer to one another, they have more meaning than merely that!
That is not ...( 1 year ago by stmichael71)
That is not Heideggar's claim at all. Heideggar's entire task is to rejuvenate the study of metaphysics - the preamble, I believe, of Being and Time is precisely on why metaphysics (aka, ontology) are valid disciplines. And, yes, they do mean the same thing. Look up both in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy if you don't believe me.
duh? that was his ...( 1 year ago by atheologica)
duh? that was his criticism of nietzsche...i can't believe you didn't understand that.
...that's why i said "but" - in order to signify i disagreed. And Being and Time is his only Kantian book, his later philosophy attacks much of what you've been arguing.
I don't accept ...( 1 year ago by stmichael71)
I don't accept Heideggar as a whole. I just referenced his defence of metaphysics as a valid field of inquiry (according to him, using his phenomenological method). And the statement was not meant directed against your on Nietzsche but merely the problem with destroying metaphysics - Heideggar is utterly opposed to that.
there is no ...( 1 year ago by atheologica)
there is no metaphysics to be destroyed anymore.
Heidegger's talk of metaphysics is talk of language and questions. Ontology isn't meta-anything. Fundamental ontology is what it is predicated as, fundamental and not an extracted view.
I would highly ...( 1 year ago by stmichael71)
I would highly disagree. Nevertheless, it just seems you like to assert it, so I don't see how I can respond. Metaphysics is perfectly acceptable and I see no reason it is not. The very work of Heideggar was to being to revive the study of metaphysics in contemporary philosophy. That was the essence of phenomenology as well, in a manner of speaking.
=P i've had a ...( 1 year ago by atheologica)
=P i've had a feast picking apart bones! - the first tenet of all philosophy!
were you blazed ...( 1 year ago by jkuzjkuz)
were you blazed when you made this?
Logic requires ...( 1 year ago by kapazas2002)
Logic requires words for interaction: Sound Medicine is presented with support from the IU Medical Group, the clinical practice of the Indiana University School of Medicine Faculty physicians; The Lilly Clinic, where healthy volunteers help develop new medicines; and Clarian, with its Call to Change to a healthier lifestyle.
It would be cool to ...( 3 months ago by JasonOnEarth)
It would be cool to write a paper on the contrasts of Martin Luther and Martin Buber. You think? You could call the paper "Luther Buber." Ahg, at least I thought it was funny.
Btw, you look very tired and out of it here but it's a compliment since you're still very thoughtful/intelligent in your thoughts. It shows a strong mind. Okay, I think I suck up too much. :-P
lol, he may have ...( 3 months ago by JasonOnEarth)
lol, he may have been tired or perhaps high on the ganja. But either way, I think he did a good job, considering. Correct? We all love ya, Matthew.
