Nothing gets wasted around here
This was good writing why did it confuse everyone?
Quote from: Goddess Eris on January 20, 2017, 02:44:45 amThis was good writing why did it confuse everyone?I have wondered that myself.
Like the terms “aesthetic” and “religious”, the term “ethics” in Kierkegaard’s work has more than one meaning. It is used to denote both: (i) a limited existential sphere, or stage, which is superseded by the higher stage of the religious life; and (ii) an aspect of life which is retained even within the religious life. In the first sense “ethics” is synonymous with the Hegelian notion of Sittlichkeit, or customary mores. In this sense “ethics” represents “the universal”, or more accurately the prevailing social norms. These social norms are used as reasons to make sense of, or justify, an action within a community. Even human sacrifice is justified in terms of how it serves the community, so that when Agamemnon sacrifices his daughter Iphigenia he is regarded as a tragic hero since his community understands that the sacrifice is required by the gods for the success of the Greek expedition to Troy (Fear and Trembling).Kierkegaard, however, recognizes duties that cannot be justified in terms of social norms. Much of Fear and Trembling turns on the notion that Abraham’s would-be sacrifice of his son Isaac is ineffable in terms of social norms, and requires a “teleological suspension of the ethical”. That is, Abraham recognizes a duty to something higher than both his social duty not to kill an innocent person and his personal commitment to his beloved son, viz. his duty to obey God’s commands. However, he cannot give an intelligible ethical justification of his act to the community in terms of social norms, but must simply obey the divine command.But in order to arrive at a position of religious faith, which might entail a “teleological suspension of the ethical”, the individual must first embrace the ethical (in the first sense). In order to raise oneself beyond the merely aesthetic life, which is a life of drifting in imagination, possibility and sensation, one needs to make a commitment. That is, the aesthete needs to choose the ethical, which entails a commitment to communication and decision procedures.
Because it involves atheism, which to some people provokes a knee-jerk reaction to interject "Yes, but..." regardless of the content.
EoC, you are the bane of my existence.
EoC doesn't make creepy.EoC makes creepy worse.
the afflicted persons get hold of and consume carrots even in socially quite unacceptable situations.
I take issue with the use of the foxhole, as foxes are pretty small creatures and there's no way two humans could fit in a hole made by one, even if one of them has a biologically smaller atheist brain (why God can't fit in it).
Don't fucking judge me, I've got tentacles for a face.
You want to be in the foxhole with the atheist. When the bombs are falling and the mud and shit are one toxic substance coating everything and nothing smells or sounds real anymore you want to be next to the atheist, and never let anyone tell you otherwise. The atheist is not going to fret over their soul when civility collapses, they will do what it takes to get through. The atheist knows that the dead do not get to change their story and the atheist knows that their only hope of immortality is their legacy and they will not let their legacy be "I abandoned my friends in their darkest hour." The atheist is not afraid of the dark.You want to be in the foxhole with the atheist, because the atheist is not counting on seeing you in the afterlife if this all goes wrong. The atheist will not give up on CPR. The atheist will not give up on anything, because they don't trust anyone or anything to get the job done if they fall. The atheist is not counting on reinforcements or miracles, they make their own.You want to be in the foxhole with the atheist, because the atheist prays by working. The atheist prays by breathing another second. The atheist has no gods but their companions and losing you is the same as losing their faith. They will not let it happen. The atheist will fight. Without concern for their morality, without concern for the heaven they get into, without delusions of martyrdom or virtue. The atheist will fight in ways you cannot, will not, and they will do it for you.
[...]I know and have met quite a few atheists who, landing on the spectrum far from this ideal, are predominantly selfish individuals who would give up on CPR and who would selfishly tuck tail and run, leaving their comrades to die.[...]
