Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
How much the New Atheists are willing to let rest on personal aesthetic preferences
It's really kind of astounding.
Comments
not sure if selfparody
But the older aestheticists seem willing to rest on their laurels, so why can't the new guys claim anti-selfishness and declare a utilitarian ceasefire of non-curtish rhetoric?
""It's so sad to think about all that they're missing. The real world, properly understood in the scientific way, is deeply beautiful and unfailingly interesting."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c
What if I think Deepak Chopra wins in a weltanschauung beauty contest Dawkins? Huh? What if I think fucking Rupert Sheldrake's metaphysics are prettier than yours are? Huh? What are you going to do?
It wouldn't be so bad if it was an isolated thing, but this is fucking all over their works.
Honestly if Kant had decided to go more on the side of Godwin than Chomsky then I could tolerate his non-intellectualized wanking over the preconceived precepts of modern alienation vis-a-vis the faxes of our loved ones, but since he seemed to be more concerned with using stream-of-conciousness to deconstruct the very concept of human etheremea as a soulful computational matrix, fuck him.
«What if I think Deepak Chopra wins in a weltanschauung beauty contest Dawkins?»
Then you either become pessimistic or die of a preventable illness.
>Huh? What if I think fucking Rupert Sheldrake's metaphysics are prettier than yours are?
>metaphysics are prettier than yours are?
>metaphysics
>pretty
If you find metaphysics anything beyond a pointlessly wanky mess, you're doing it wrong.
I'm sorry MORITZ SCHLICK I didn't know you posted in IJBM!
Metaphysical art can be beautiful.
One thing to keep in mind Milos. That's art inspired by metaphysics. Metaphysics themselves are always a messy and pointless endeavor. Similar how an anatomy text can have illustrations laid out perfectly and beautifully, but once you start cutting up an actual human you have a bloody mess. And at least with anatomy you can dissect a physical thing to bring about greater understanding. Metaphysics? You're don't have a physical thing to pull apart and are stuck bashing your head against... what's already inside your head I guess.
To be honest, I'm not a fan of overt metaphysical speculations, but you can't have philosophy without a tiny bit of metaphysics.
The light dove cleaving in free flight the thin air, whose resistance it feels, might imagine that her movements would be far more free and rapid in airless space. just in the same way did Plato, abandoning the world of sense because of the narrow limits it sets to the understanding, venture upon the wings of ideas beyond it, into the void space of pure intellect. He did not reflect that he made no real progress by all his efforts; for he met with no resistance which might serve him for a support, as it were, whereon to rest, and on which he might apply his powers, in order to let the intellect acquire momentum for its progress