A rather long and challenging piece, but incredibly worthwhile if you have the time and interest. Please see the link for the author's footnotes and sources.
To: unspun; Alamo-Girl; logos; cornelis; r9etb; William Terrell; Hank Kerchief; beckett; Diamond; ...
FYI, here's a real beauty of an essay that unspun found. Lots to chew on here -- if you have the time and interest.
To: betty boop; fortheDeclaration; Commander8; editor-surveyor; ksen; Gal.5:1; Alamo-Girl
Thanks for the article, BP
'Philosophical'......'ethics'....
:-(
(Romans 10:17)
Maranatha!
:-)
3 posted on
05/19/2003 10:03:03 AM PDT by
maestro
To: general_re
In his hopes of finding a new myth that is not "somebody's" but could be "everybody's," Rue is in fact reenacting the mythos of modernity What say, 2 points for this höflich lumpenschlumper?
5 posted on
05/19/2003 10:24:52 AM PDT by
cornelis
To: betty boop
Worthy considerations here.
For adjustments, I suggest that a distinction be made between "mythos" and "history" Likewise between "concept" and "covenant." A forgivable slip, for sure. Also, a further elucidation of the kinds of dualisms at play to prevent the reponse, There is no duality .
The author fails to prevent that red herring.
9 posted on
05/19/2003 10:37:25 AM PDT by
cornelis
To: betty boop
There is nothing new in the world - maybe someday the author will discover Zen.
14 posted on
05/19/2003 11:10:18 AM PDT by
Humvee
To: betty boop
YEC read later
To: betty boop
Ive read the article again in some detail and wanted to share a few reactions. This is a very interesting essay and I applaud the authors acknowledgment of the ancient Hebrew wisdom: oriented around such a notion of speech, [they] thus located reality primarily in the spoken word.
She says with regard to decontextualized knowing:
"The challenge of epistemology, then, is also an ethical venture because both have to do with how we locate or place ourselves in the world. If it is true that we are not godlike, disincarnate knowers, then how are we to understand or locate ourselves as knowers? What mythos or imaginative resources can we draw upon to give us a truthful account of scientific and theological knowing?
IMHO, she jumped a bit too fast over the disincarnate knowers. For instance, how could she conclude that we are not disincarnate knowers in a larval existence in mortal life, who must undergo a metamorphosis upon mortal death to assume the adult character? In that example, the mortal knower may be imbued with surpassing insight - perchance, in ethics? I would have liked to have seen a paragraph or two there...
To: *crevo_list
A ping to those who find the Creation/Evolution discussion often getting into... the kind philosophical discussion treated head on, herein.
I'm going to see Matrix-2 tonight, by theme a "classic" dip into postmodernism? See you later.
26 posted on
05/19/2003 2:28:11 PM PDT by
unspun
("Do everything in love.")
To: betty boop
"A rather long and challenging piece..." BB, If I had a boat, I could go for a cruise on this endless sea of meaningless psuedocognitive, psychomasturbational jargon
31 posted on
05/19/2003 8:20:39 PM PDT by
editor-surveyor
( . Best policy RE: Environmentalists, - ZERO TOLERANCE !!)
To: betty boop
Both modernism's disinterested spectator and postmodernism's deconstructed self ...Are we really supposed to read beyond this parody of intellectualism? The Onion could not come up with a better lead.
37 posted on
05/20/2003 8:47:14 AM PDT by
js1138
To: cinFLA; A CA Guy; RnMomof7; nicmarlo
An article that may be challenging to those who believe they've enlightened themselves, including our fans of dope merchandising -- "pass it on."
rnm, great to get your pings.
58 posted on
05/20/2003 8:54:58 PM PDT by
unspun
("Do everything in love.")
To: betty boop
bookmark for later...
59 posted on
05/21/2003 8:31:41 AM PDT by
Stultis
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson