19 Mar 08
Originally posted by marmalade teacakeLOL....
responsibility.........I heard that word somewhere once......... 😉
As someone wrote: "A women drove me to drink - and I never got the chance to thank her."
😀
I was under the influence when I first met the woman who was to become my wife. Role reversal for me. She doesn't drink so I decided to abstain. More the better for it. She doesn't play chess either! :'(:'(
Hence....... my time here is very limited now....... by choice, not by request.. 😉
19 Mar 08
Originally posted by Raven69Do you have adequate textual resources for ascribing a satisfying reason for not believing in the real world; to questions about the semantics of your moral claim that it is a myth and your adequate grounds for ‘assigning’ such a subtle view - using both ethical language as primarily cognitive or non-cognitive? 😛
Real world is a myth...I refuse to believe in its existence!
-m
19 Mar 08
that epistemological approach to the phenomenological existentialism of being and nothingness lending to intentionality an imperative to question the very non-existence of meaning and the very existence of nothing leads me to wonder why that question should or should not be asked, or rather, if in trying to understand the question one is really missing the point, as if there might happen to actually be one
19 Mar 08
Originally posted by coquette🙂
that epistemological approach to the phenomenological existentialism of being and nothingness lending to intentionality an imperative to question the very non-existence of meaning and the very existence of nothing leads me to wonder why that question should or should not be asked, or rather, if in trying to understand the question one is really missing the point, as if there might happen to actually be one
19 Mar 08
Originally posted by mikelom🙂
Do you have adequate textual resources for ascribing a satisfying reason for not believing in the real world; to questions about the semantics of your moral claim that it is a myth and your adequate grounds for ‘assigning’ such a subtle view - using both ethical language as primarily cognitive or non-cognitive? 😛
-m
19 Mar 08
Originally posted by coquetteYou point to your own question as to whether or not it should be posed. That in itself contains semiotic value of a judgment, a resultat per se, of, indeed, no denial of a presupposition of the human agency. As accepting the human agency thorough cultural and interiority conflicts you are, in fact, accepting that the real world being a myth is indeed a myth! 😛
that epistemological approach to the phenomenological existentialism of being and nothingness lending to intentionality an imperative to question the very non-existence of meaning and the very existence of nothing leads me to wonder why that question should or should not be asked, or rather, if in trying to understand the question one is really missing the point, as if there might happen to actually be one
19 Mar 08
Originally posted by mikelom...yes.
Do you have adequate textual resources for ascribing a satisfying reason for not believing in the real world; to questions about the semantics of your moral claim that it is a myth and your adequate grounds for ‘assigning’ such a subtle view - using both ethical language as primarily cognitive or non-cognitive? 😛
-m
