[lit-ideas] Re: 2006 reading lists
- From: Paul Stone <pas@xxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 17:38:25 -0500
US: Yes, the difference between theoretical knowledge and visceral
knowledge. You might agree with Berkeley and Hume that there is no 'out
there,' but you still have to walk around the furniture on your way to the
bathroom. And you might agree with Spinoza that there is no free will,
but you still have to decide which pizza place to order from when you get
hungry. What would/could you do differently if you went 'whole hog'
with Russell and Dawkins?
I think I'd have to cap myself. I'd be even more depressed than I already
am. If there's no meaning to life, then there's no meaning to MY life and
it becomes COMPLETELY absurd and unliveable and most of all HOPELESS. I
have to have a tinge of hope -- and this is probably why religion is so
popular -- that there is something after. I'm just realistic enough to know
that I have NO clue what it is.
So, in the mean time I won't claim to adhere to tenets (almost all of which
seem completely arbitrary and ridiculous) of any religion and go on my
merry way as if [spirit/mind] Paul will continue to exist after [body] Paul
ceases to be. It's really the only thing I TRULY believe and it's probably
just as completely ridiculous as everyone else who has any faith of any
kind. Everything else is malleable in my system.
I simply cannot with complete conviction say that I baselessly "believe" in
anything else. I only know that I have no clue what might be after. I guess
I don't even really believe, I just HOPE. Without hope, there really isn't
much.
not knowing much,
hopeful and naive,
p
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
