I was really just answering your question as to whether art should reflect reality in the context of making a distinction between life and reality. This is related to my reading preoccupation at the moment, which is Michel Henry. He makes a phenomenological distinction between life as lived and the external world (relaity) — Janus
So is this inherently dualistic? According to Henry, or (preferably) you? — Noble Dust
Also, I appreciate your Berdyaev references, but I trust you don't take me as some Berdy devotee. :P My philosophy is pretty unorganized at the moment, but still influenced by ol' Berdy. — Noble Dust
If I remember correctly, Berdyaev rejects both monism and dualism; being for him is a symbolic manifestation of spirit. — Janus
So, I think its more like some form of non-dualism for Berdyaev. — Janus
Not sure about Henry, but since he is a phenomenologist, I would suspect he rejects metaphysics, and certainly anything resembling substance ontology. — Janus
What's wrong with being a Berd fanboy? :P — Janus
I liked Berdyaev's overall approach when I read him, but he is not a rigorous systematic thinker in the way Henry is. — Janus
I'm finding Henry's ideas very interesting, and also that many of his thoughts are developments of the kinds of things I have thought. I had a similar experience with the Berd, in terms of the cascades of soaring insights he delivers. — Janus
Don't know him; would be interested given a more detailed account about him. — Noble Dust
Ha! No one feeds your ego on TPF, that's what... — Noble Dust
That's why I like him; I don't do well with systems, which makes me a poor philosopher in modern terms. I join Berdyaev in that position of opposition to modernity. — Noble Dust
The Berd definitely delivers and then some on the soaring Berdian heights. I'm always a sucker for those views, so I'll at least do a google search of Henry. — Noble Dust
Hmmm. I would say that if you find TP interesting, it must be because of some glimmer of your experience that resonates with the show. Unless you enjoy it purely on escapist terms. — Noble Dust
That might be fine for philosophy, but what about art? I think that's the missing piece in your critique here; art doesn't use your reason; art isn't "robust" and minimal (it can be). Art is primarily seductive, in a sense. It's more immediate than reason; the experience of "what the fuck is going on, why are there two Coopers??" is not only emotional and dramatic, but it does have a philosophical underpinning that grounds the immediateness of the experience. Why are there two Coopers? What does that mean philosophically? Two identities? Someone being other than they claim to be? Someone having an outer (real world) and an inner (philosophy forum) life? But the immediate experience is visceral, not reasonable. Why begin at a (further off) abstract position, when the immediate position for inquiry is, by nature of experience, the now? — Noble Dust
What does rationality obtain, then? Robustness? What does that actually mean if it's not certain? If reality, ala TP is not beholden to rational observation, then you would need to let go of that fundamental grounding and search for something else; something not irrational, but something intuitive. Something that begins with, and trusts in, experience. — Noble Dust
You actually are precluding the possibility of those new hidden realities by beginning with evidence (presumably of the reasoned/material kind) as the litmus test for their possibility. In other words, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy; "I'm open to the unknown, as long as it is measurable". — Noble Dust
How many religious texts and commentaries have you read? — Noble Dust
Through imagination! The mother of worlds... — Noble Dust
Considering I'm almost 50 years younger than him, I have no idea. :) — Noble Dust
No; would I like it if I'm a TP fanatic? :P — Noble Dust
There are connections like that which make sense, yes, but that's not "the entire thing". Even something so simple as "has anyone seen Billy?", or why there were so many one-off characters having conversations at the Roadhouse, are more of what I'm referring to. — Noble Dust
lways interpreted the first two seasons as trying to make sense of sexual abuse in general, and the "cycle of abuse"; I interpret Leland's lines in his death scene to mean that Bob was also a real person who abused him in his childhood. — Noble Dust
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.