Pascal was frightened (Pensées
206) of the infinite spaces...
but do we see the "Hubble (Ultra/Extreme) Deep Field" as awesome,
or awful?
(aside from the psychological fact that such is only infinitesimally relevant to most humans in their lives, and the likely physical-ontological fact that we are only infinitesimally relevant to "it")
50+. "Ach, es ist schwer, diese Gottesspur zu finden inmitten dieses Lebens, das wir fuhren, inmitten dieser so sehr zufriedenen, so sehr bürgerlichen, so sehr geistlosen Zeit, im Anblick dieser Architekturen, dieser Geschäfte, dieser Politik, dieser Menschen. Wie sollte ich nicht ein Steppenwolf und ruppiger Eremit sein inmitten einer Welt, von deren Zielen ich keines teile, von deren Freude keine zu mir spricht?" -- from Hesse's Steppenwolf
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Origen, Eusebius, Augustine, Orosius
in the direction of the history of meaning made or found in "History", the "allegorizing" of Origen, the interpretive flexibilities of Eusebius, Augustine and Orosius, reveal their dreamy assumptions of being able to speak of and for "God". a dreaminess that still continues with many today. they were not really awake.
perhaps interesting to read of Nietzsche on them; and to see how complexly Feuerbach considered their personal interpretive projections
perhaps interesting to read of Nietzsche on them; and to see how complexly Feuerbach considered their personal interpretive projections
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
post-historical contemplation of the mundane?
if, in deeper recognition, the varied traditional religions must be seen as anachronistic, passe and provincial -- if one cannot simply turn to their saints, startzi, holy men, gurus, hermits, for some "ultimate" evaluation of earthly life...what can be the inner (and outer) position of a contemplative, one who wishes to see the mundane world sub specie aeternitatis in a global age (which is, in deeper recognition, religiously plural, if not post-religious, and also post-modern)? from which position might they speak?
Emerson contra Faust
Depths of persons, perspectives, cultures and influences are revealed when Emerson said to Charles Eliot Norton in London (in April 1873 -- after RWE's trip in Egypt, and before returning to the Massachusetts with CEN): "I hate 'Faust'. It is a bad book." (Letter of Charles Eliot Norton, vol. 1, p. 488; Journal, London, April 20-May 10, 1873)
Transcendental Emerson < > Cynical Carlyle
after meetings with Carlyle, Emerson, Darwin, et al in London in April 1873, Charles Eliot Norton characterized the difference between Carlyle and Emerson in a letter so:
"They have grown apart; content with the world is the humor of one, discontent with it that of the other. Both, however, are alike in the underlying tenderness and sweetness of their souls. Emerson finds Carlyle too cynical, Carlyle finds Emerson too transcendental; daily intercourse is not delightful, but each recognizes in the other the highest gifts of nature..." (Letter of Charles Eliot Norton, vol. 1, p. 485-486; letter to J. R. Lowell, April 20, 1873)
"They have grown apart; content with the world is the humor of one, discontent with it that of the other. Both, however, are alike in the underlying tenderness and sweetness of their souls. Emerson finds Carlyle too cynical, Carlyle finds Emerson too transcendental; daily intercourse is not delightful, but each recognizes in the other the highest gifts of nature..." (Letter of Charles Eliot Norton, vol. 1, p. 485-486; letter to J. R. Lowell, April 20, 1873)
Monday, February 25, 2013
Sunday, February 24, 2013
the missing half
that there is some ideal, completing 'other half' is a dreamy belief which current presence cannot be fully accounted for by a mere history of/and transmission of chivalric and romantic idea(l)s.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)