You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: There is going to be blasphemy here. Big time Blasphemy! Thank God for XVIII Century Illuminism. (Letters 8.0)

in Dream Steem • 3 months ago

grafik.png

I started to talk on this book, but then I stopped. It is or was a best seller, but it is so very bad that it is wasting time to discuss it. To be honest, I regard as an insulting of my intellect.
So, although I'm not convinced of your claims and thought, I regard them to be better than Dawkins', at least better readable. ;-)

Announcement: I'll be offline for about 48 hours.

3 months ago in Dream Steem by
$0.00
    Reply 7
    Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     3 months ago 

    Noted. there's no hurry.
    Dawkins should be delivered into the hands of the XIII Century Holy Inquisition for them to do as they please.
    That dogmatic bastard is worse than most religious fanatics, because, for one: he should know better.

    $0.00
      Reply
      [-]
       3 months ago 

      P.S. - Also, I don't want to convince anyone. It's my own private personal religion. Works for me and, probably, for nobody else. Also, my shite explains the black matter problem. lmfao.

      $0.00
        Reply
        [-]
         3 months ago (edited)

        If I present words to show my thoughts - be it a cooking advisory or my private personal religion (whicht might be the same...) - what is my communicational goal? What my intention? Just to show something like a hand woven towel or a work of some art? To only avoke one of my teacher's 'interesseloses Wohlgefallen' ('disinterested pleasure'; what means pleasure without any further purpose), which signifies this teacher's concept of aesthetics?

        [-]
         2 months ago 

        Dear @ty-ty,
        after considerable thought given to this interrogation, I find your question arose four new questions for me: Is everything we do, Art? Why do emit our opinions, even into the void, like in a notebook or a diary that no one is expected to read? Does the fact that we exchange opinions, or debate eachother bear any meaning in the motion that Nietschinger's God-Cat does to undertand itself? Do all meaningless actions carry a meaning towards the self knowledge of the Total Conscience?

        $0.02
        • Past Payouts $0.02
        • - Author $0.01
        • - Curators $0.01
        1 vote
        Reply
        [-]
         2 months ago 
        1. No, it isn't.
        2. Because we are born to communicate.
        3. No, since there is no God-Cat at all.
        4. No, it's the other way round: meaning follows deductive, not inductive principles.
        [-]
         2 months ago 
        1. I agree.
        2. Are we? Let me think about that.
        3. Funny.
        4. I also agree, except I have re-read the question and I understand I din't word it properly. Still, it's unimportant, as it was a question and not an opinion and we do agree on this. I will be giving further thought to number 2.
        $0.02
        • Past Payouts $0.02
        • - Author $0.01
        • - Curators $0.01
        1 vote
        Reply
        [-]
         3 months ago (edited)

        Good question. Let me think about it.. 'interessloses Wohlgefallen' seems to me an inherent contradiction. Wouldn't pleasure be the sum interest, in that case?

        $0.00
          Reply