[lit-ideas] Re: Beyond Belief
- From: Michael Chase <goya@xxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:49:09 -0700
Le 22 ao=FBt 04, =E0 19:41, Mike Geary a =E9crit :
> As a matter of fact, I've just started reading _Beyond Belief_ by =20
> Elaine
> Pagels. Interesting book. I just finished her _Gnostic Gospels_. =20=
> She's a
> very readable historian of religion. Having accepted the fact that
> Christianity is probably not going to go away anytime soon, I've =20
> decided to
> try to reach some accomodation with it, you know, find out where it =20=
> came
> from, what it wants, and how it evolved into the thing it is today. I =
=20
> find
> Pagels very enlightening. Has anyone else read her?
M.C. Yup. She's another one of that rare breed, the genuine scholar who =20=
can write well for a popular audience. When I first read the Gnostic =20
Gospels many moons ago, inspired me to study everything I could get my =20=
hands on the subject. The interest still persist, although I seem to =20
recall that she presents the Gnostics as femininists *avant la lettre*, =20=
whereas in fact most of them were, it seems to me, pretty misogynistic.
Another good book is Pagels' Adam, Eve and the Serpent. By the =
way, =20
her husband Heinz Pagels is a well-known physicist. Their dinner =20
conversations must be interesting.
>
> Mike Geary
> Memphis
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx>
> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 9:21 PM
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Beyond Belief
>
>
>>
>>
>> "Beyond belief", "Unbelievable"
>>
>> Was: "A Hard Imagining"
>>
>> In a message dated 8/22/2004 10:07:08 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>> aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>> I just have a hard imagining that when one combines men and booze =
and
>> professional pleasers let's call them, that sex isn't involved. It =20=
>> still
> leaves
>> the question of why these men prefer geishas to spending time at =20
>> home.
> House
>> of Sand and Fog again ...
>> In re-reading this just before deleting it, I notice I wrote "I just =
=20
>> have
> a
>> hard imagining". Filling in the blanks the ol fingers leave, I =20
>> meant to
> say,
>> I have a hard time imagining ... I imagine you all figured it =20
>> wasn't a
> hard
>> on. I think I'll give myself typing lessons for Christmas.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----
>>
>> Actually, I read the original sentence to mean that you had a 'hard
>> imagining', literally, i.e. a difficult act of imagination.
>>
>> Some people use 'imagine' (and notably, 'conceive') like that. They =20=
>> say,
> "It
>> is pretty inconceivable that..." and then add what they have _just_ =20=
>> noted
> it
>> was not possible to conceive.
>>
>> I'm glad you only had a 'hard time' and not a 'hard imagining'. =20
>> Imagining
>> should always be a pleasant, easy flowing experience.
>>
>> The epitome is again in the Alice Books, where Lewis Carroll pokes =20=
>> fun at
>> people who 'overuse' 'unbelievable!':
>>
>>
>> --- Quote:
>>
>> I'm just one hundred and one, five months and a day.'
>> `I can't believe THAT!' said Alice.
>> `Can't you?' the Queen said in a pitying tone. `Try again: draw a =20=
>> long
>> breath, and shut your eyes.'
>> Alice laughed. `There's not use trying,' she said: `one CAN'T =
believe
>> impossible things.'
>> `I daresay you haven't had much practice,' said the Queen. `When I =20=
>> was
> your
>> age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've =20
>> believed
> as
>> many as six impossible things before breakfast.
>> --- End of Quote:
>> Note that the Queen is right, "The Queen is one hundred and one, five
> months
>> and a day" is _quite_ possible to believe.
>> A recent philosophy title dealing with these problems is:
>> Conceivability and Possibility
>> edited by _Tamar Szabo Gendler_
>>
> (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/=20
> index=3Dbooks&field-autho
> r=3DGendler,%2520Tamar%2520Szabo/002-6770060-1806
>> 440) and _John O'Leary-Hawthorne_
>>
> (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/=20
> index=3Dbooks&field-autho
> r=3DO'Leary-Hawthorne,%2520John/002-6770060-18
>> 06440) (OUP blurb below), with contributions by M. Della Rocca et =20=
>> al.
>> Cheers,
>> JL
>> ---
>> "The capacity to represent things to ourselves as possible plays a
> crucial
>> role both in everyday thinking and in philosophical reasoning; this
> volume
>> offers much-needed philosophical illumination of conceivability,
> possibility,
>> and the relations between them."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
>> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>
>
Michael Chase
(goya@xxxxxxxxxxx)
CNRS UPR 76
7, rue Guy Moquet
Villejuif 94801
France
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
