NIETZSCHE: THE DEATH OF GOD
Dr. Jai Maharaj
Jai Maharaj
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti
In article <3PK19.12160$pg2.9...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"News2020" <user...@att.net> posted:
>
> Forgive me for being somewhat iconoclastic in stating this.
>
> Why does it take a great deal of thinking or philosophy to say that art is a
> representation of the inner being. Or for that matter, that theories of God
> and Evolution are just theories, not provable easily; therefore, somebody
> could very well say they are wrong. Once you get off a straight line model
> and look at a circular model, you may visualize that evil exists, but
> eventually good succeeds; then again the cycle repeats. There is no need to
> deny people the right to their beliefs; the opposite does not have a proof
> either. It is just a theory too.
>
> Not in the least as a put down to closet philosophers, such thinkers are
> needed; but, they cannot lay claim to fame by denying what happened before.
> Nameless philosophers have come and gone ages before even any civilization
> existed in the 'west'. Do we see any mention of them in these works of the
> last two or three centuries. Philosophy after all is pursuit of knowledge -
> not power or wealth or fame. Therefore, if the ideas stand the test of
> reviews without any names attached, maybe they have some value. However, if
> by removing the names, the ideas do not carry much weight, then we need to
> re-think the whole business of modern philosophy.
>
> This is carrying it too far to an extreme to make a point; so I will stop
> here.
>
>
> "ano457" <ano...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:cf697647.02073...@posting.google.com...
> > LECTURE 1
> ....
> "It is only as an aesthetic
> > phenomenon that the being of man and the world are eternally
> > justified." The insistence on the autonomy of art became the recipe
> > for modernism, the movement (or sequence of movements) which broke
> > with centuries-old conventions of representation and disconnected art
> > from traditional morality. As we'll see next time, this insistence on
> > the aesthetic as the only possible source of redemption looks back to
> > Nietzsche's principal mentor, Schopenhauer, but it also looks forward
> > to the great literary modernists: Conrad, Joyce, Rilke, and Woolf.
>
>
>
>
News2020
The higher the PR (propaganda) factor goes, the more the innocents; with
today's technology, there is no limit except in the capacity of human
intelligence (vs. neanderthal, etc.)...
"Dr. Jai Maharaj" <use...@mantra.com> wrote in message
news:philosophy-19l...@news.mantra.com...
Mike Dubbeld
get lucky. Everybody has lack of experience in one way
or another. Sorry to hear your problems. I call this particular
brand of confusion Existential Gloom.
Mike Dubbeld
"Dr. Jai Maharaj" <use...@mantra.com> wrote in message
news:philosophy-19l...@news.mantra.com...
Dr. Jai Maharaj
"Mike Dubbeld" <mi...@erols.com> posted:
> Better you be confused than me. Maybe someday you will
> get lucky. Everybody has lack of experience in one way
> or another. Sorry to hear your problems. I call this particular
> brand of confusion Existential Gloom.
> Mike Dubbeld
What problems, and whose?
Jai Maharaj
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti
> Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote in message
Mike Dubbeld
> In article <aia2s2$ebn$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
> "Mike Dubbeld" <mi...@erols.com> posted:
> > Better you be confused than me. Maybe someday you will
> > get lucky. Everybody has lack of experience in one way
> > or another. Sorry to hear your problems. I call this particular
> > brand of confusion Existential Gloom.
> > Mike Dubbeld
>
> What problems, and whose?
Sorry, I misread the top is yours I thought the bottom was
also. Time for some surgery on the original of a far less wishy
washy sort.
They have you fooled don't they.
The insistence on the autonomy of art became the recipe
> > > > > for modernism, the movement (or sequence of movements) which broke
> > > > > with centuries-old conventions of representation and disconnected
art
> > > > > from traditional morality.
What happened does not mean it is correct. It is interesting
to view art being shapped by the attitude of the time. However,
what happens when the thought of the day is wrong? What
shall we say about its art? Personally I think while Picaso is
different I certainly wouldn't compare it with Rapahel or
Michaelangelo. Art did not shape the philosophy of the day,
philosophy of the day influenced art. Since beauty is in the
eye of the beholder - how could what one painted be wrong?
Sounds more like a license to cut corners to me. The Modernism
movement with emphasis on the individual/'Beauty is in the
eye of the beholder' is something you likely can not thwart. Futher it is
equally unlikely that you can draw any kind of a correlation between that
phrase and 'Man is the measure of all things.' Equally false/wrong. Post
Modernism all by its
lonesome arose for a reason. Just as Late Post Modernism.
Nietzsche was an idiot (and apparently did not read Plato
either - where Socrates makes Protagoras look foolish). He
was also insane and a whiner and a paranoid.
Mike Dubbeld