Quote:
|
Originally Posted by <<<GUILLE>>> LLoyd,I agree with you completelly. We need a new way of looking at the being. But please do realize that with Anun and Emotional Materialsim (you are the best at naming, I could have not think of anything better) I intent to surpass the surppass of metaphysics. I want to go over posmodern philosophy, not to go back. I don't want to create a new metaphysics. I want to create a new geishe (talk, discourse) about the being, but not a metaphysics. I want this new talk to have the good from metaphysics but not the bad, just as Anun has the good of Abun but not the bad. I'll check about Lenin's critique, I believe I will like it. |
Guille, I agree that the new talk should have the good but not the bad, also the simple not the complex___but how to describe the complex singularities of "being", being and being in simple language is a tall order. IMO the three beings just mentioned must be boiled down to basic heart and head relational language and dialogues. These three beings would be 1.personality/ego/reason/intuition 2.essence/emotions/soul/intuition 3.universal concept/universal idea/universal singularity/logic/intuition. Now, at present, all three of these beings have complex relationships with both heart and head___what is needed is an easily understood simplification of all the possible relationships___also realizing that different people put more emphases on either heart or head relationships as more primary___I guess like subjective/objective or predicate/subject. Since these are the most basic ideas of human understanding, they would be the most important to concentrate on, I believe.
You see, again IMO, any true talk must be encompassing enough to take in all the diverse personalities and ideas of all groups, yet make perfect sense to the many with one major set of new ideas___again a tall order, yet I do think possible if discussed enough to boil down. As a matter of fact my wife and I had about a three hour conversation about this very topic tonight. She agrees that all the metaphysical mumbo-jumbo is entirely unnecessary, and can be simplified___as a matter of fact she says it already is___it's just certain members of society challenging, knowingly and unknowingly, the simplicity of which she sees the whole issue. She says all this talk of modern complexity, especially as to the singularity, has been with us for centuries in one form or another___and confusion has reigned in place of simplicity. Her simple statement of "being" is; "I am as any being I choose to be, or not be."
Now do you see all the complexity this simple statement sets in play? Imagination is the key player in her statement, yet truth is its major and minor premises. The female has been beckoning us to play in her predicate playground for many, many centuries and we have been avoiding her___I think it's time we dabbled in her simple intuitive logical mysteries___just a bit. Female has much to tell us of taking our subjects into the predicate world of the here and now, and maybe together we can all start to see and build a better future...
more later,
regards