[lit-ideas] Re: The meaning of life
- From: "Phil Enns" <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 16:30:58 +0700
Walter O. wrote:
"Lots of things can be two things at once. But they can't be two
contradictory things, clearly."
to which Eric Y. wrote:
"I give these examples because it seems that 'reason' or 'logic' only
concerns itself with half of existence. It is knowing without a
knower. To privilege the so-called objective side of consciousness is
to have the recipe for a Reuben sandwich without the taste of it. Or
to describe the physiology and ideation of love without the experience
of being in love."
Doesn't Eric, in the above, perform Walter's observation? Doesn't
Eric, by asserting the nature of 'reason' or 'logic' as being this and
not that, instantiate the logical claim that a thing cannot be
something and its opposite, in the same respect? Put differently, if
Eric did not accept Walter's claim, he most likely would deny that
there was any such thing as 'reason' or 'logic'. Instead, by trying
to better define the two, he reinforces Walter's point.
Living in a wonderland of contradictions,
Phil Enns
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
