OT Funeral readings

If it makes just once person actually bloody think and question
reality then it's a good day's fishing.

Pre or post marriage and baby?

<grabs beer, pipe and cat and starts making lewd remarks>

This any better?

<stands still doing not a lot but leaving all around in no doubt that
something terrible could happen>

Or this?

Personally I prefer to be able to encompass all archetypes.

<wanders off whistling>

 

Exactly. I don't think you need the theological background for it to
be interesting but if you do have it then you'll certainly get more
out of it.

It's certainly not my (always under construction) belief system but he
makes valid points about historical changes in world view and has a
pop at the post modernists which is always good for a giggle.

 

Why is making people think about a particular thing a good thing? I've
never understood this.

Pre. She got married? I haven't read Mr P for some time.

That's Granny.

Not really.

 

I only got as far as "...read it all as poetic clever thematic
metaphor; adopt a reading attitude of rigorous theme-oriented
nonliteralism and put your main focus on theme-detection" before I
gave up.

"It's English, Jim, but not as we know it."


--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

 

you're not helping yourself. Whoever wrote that clearly doesn't
understand what "science" means. That doesn't mean that the second
sentence you've quoted is necessarily untrue, of course - many /
scientists/ can be self-deluded, but saying that "science" and
"religion" are part of the "same thing" is just bollocks.

 

<G>

But you just said in another post at 10:28 "Why would I care - I won't be
there."

;-)

For what it's worth, these days I'm pretty much of your pure science views -
there is no controlling power, there is so 'spirit' - we're just animals,
and when we die, that's it. I used to have more belief, then, things
happened to change that

 

Because it's fun? And you get new insights? And those insights kick
off further research? And further research leads to more new stuff?

A random thought could start someone down a path that could find a
cure for cancer or find a way of exploding the planet. I feel a sense
of mystery and wonder at this

Oh dear. I better go and wash my hair and wait for someone in a jingly
hat.

In Lords and Ladies, the midsummer night's dream (loosely) based one.

It is what it is.

Nah, that's Nanny.

Oh well.

 

Nanny Ogg, YTC.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

 

I sit corrected.

 

My Firefox Rabbling Tosh Blocker won't let me open that.

 

by definition you can't mount a /rational/ rebuttal if you're going to
resort to irrationality and "belief" as part of your "argument".

You can assert that rationality is not the only valid mode of thought,
but unfortunately, from a rationalist point of view, this is
meaningless.

That might lead you to assert that rationality is therefore a closed
subset of all modes of thought. But if you do that you need to throw
out logic, reasoning and epistemology.

But you know, it really wouldn't be rational of me to waste any more
time arguing with someone who would assert that the irrational is
valid.


you might like this, though:

http://www.imprint.co.uk/Wilber.htm

 

Wasn't trying to.

Indeed. But in tabloid reading public understanding hasn't it ceased
to be a process and become an amorphous blob in a lab coat anyway?

Well if that thing is the universe as a whole it isn't...

 

Pratchett doesn't count.

 

Heh. I'm going to use that one.

 

Saying the above is pure science is a nonsense - pure science is really
just a completely different group of concepts used to explain things we
don't fully understand. A different type of fiction to religion.

 

How about, "Faster and faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the
fear of death"?

 

<Snip> some pretentious stuff..

Sounds like a song I wrote when I was about 18 with the main lines
being:

#I have dreamed dreams too bright by far
#For their shuttered earthbound minds
#So they tear me down, chain me with bars of chemical
#Until I have seen the pheonix fly,
#Despairing on the wind.

And no - I couldn't tell you what it's about either (except it was a
whole series of songs about madness and that one was about (I think)
mytics who go too far and lose all connection[1] with reality.

As I said - I was 18 at the time and thought it was great. I still like
the chord-sequence I put with it that starts on f#m7 and progresses
from there. I can't play it properly now though..

Phil.

[1] And before anyone says - it wasn't an autobiography.

 

Well, you knew what I meant heh. 'Pure Science' was just meant as looking
on it without like, spritual and religous twists. I wasn't meaning 'Pure
Science' as a concept or whatever.

 

*Ding*

"Funerals are for the living, not the dead[1]". As I've told Cheryl as
far as I'm concerned she can cut me up and use me as cat & dog food.

Somehow I doubt that she will though!

Phil.

[1] "for the dead know nothing"

 

Well yes. I wasn't seeking to rebutt because it wasn't an argument I
was making. I was getting the books to see how many other threads I
could weave in.

Now we really need Porl at this point for the full on metaphysics
experience

Which is where we came in.

Hmmmm, not sure I agree.

I try not to assign validity for others, merely to point out
possibilities. I frequently fail of course.

Yes I do, thank you.