[lit-ideas] Re: Got Home

  • From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:39:40 +0000 (GMT)




________________________________

From: Andy mimi.erva@xxxxxxxxx

When the last Pope died, his death was spoken of as a going home [to his 
Father's House] - and where did Jesus go [; and indeed where did E.T. (the 
Spielberg Jesus, who came down to earth, died, resurrected and went "home" 
after saying "Be good" and feeling other's pain for them) want to phone]? That 
the "Going Home" is a journey relating to death, as Ursula suggests, seems 
correct. And it would seem it refers not merely to the journey made to death 
but beyond - or at least to some transformed state that is "home", and that 
comes about either after death or by dying. It could therefore be left open 
that this "home" is not some further or altered state of being so much as a 
state of non-being such as the non-being from which we started out, and which 
in that sense is "home": so the song permits a reading that does not imply 
there is an afterlife but simply a returning, in or by death, to what was 
before - non-being or no 'life' or whatever there was.
 [It is against this backdrop that Cohen wants to reassure his Leonard that he 
doesn't need to be propounding any great vision].

 >Adding to my list of many talents beginning with can't type and progressing 
to can't read, I also wasn't impugning the tubes idea from John Wager.  I love 
that idea.  It's so true.  In rereading the post yet again, I do disagree 
only that it doesn't begin to address the idea of what makes us human.  Of 
course it does.>

The term "elaboration" leaves open how far from a basic "tube" we are. Second, 
it leaves open in what senses we remain tube-like:- the important thing that 
makes us human is not that we err, or consume at one end and excrete at 
another, for these are not unique or specific to humans and so not explanatory 
of "what makes us human". What is distinctive and unique about humans is their 
World 2 and the interaction of their World 2 with a World 3. The upshot is that 
it is not to err that is human but the capacity to consciously correct errors; 
it is the consumption and production of World 3 content that is uniquely and 
specifically human. Really, philosophically speaking, Leonard should have 
written "brief emergence from a tube". This would have left open how, 
metaphysically, what emerges might stand on a different level to what it 
emerged from. He should also have crowbarred in a reference to World 3 or 'The 
Third World'. 

But Leonard, I believe, put aside The Self And Its Brain somewhere about page 
1. To my knowledge, he has not said anything in response to my posts here 
either.

Donal
Staffs

Other related posts: