Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

On Debate and Existence: Excerpts from Voegelin
The Collected Works of Eric Voegelin, Vol. 12 ^ | 1990 | Erice Voegelin

Posted on 12/08/2002 12:25:26 PM PST by betty boop

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-200 next last
To: betty boop
Correspondingly we shall define untruth of existence as a revolt against the conditio humana and the attempt to overlay its reality by the construction of a Second Reality….

I have become somewhat confused by Voegelin's use of the word "reality." What precisely does he mean by it? Are partisans of Second Realities like the denizens of Plato's Cave? And if so, isn't Voegelin simply restating Plato's metaphor in a less poetic fashion?

61 posted on 12/08/2002 6:59:37 PM PST by Dumb_Ox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cornelis; widowithfoursons
Please, bb. Give us something quotable--like Cicero.

O.K., from the Tusculan Disputations (courtesy E. Voegelin, translator, and on-point regarding the problem of pneumopathological disease):

"As there are diseases of the body, so there are diseases of the mind (morbi animorum); the diseases are generally caused through a confusion of the mind by twisted opinion (pravarum opinionum conturbatio), resulting in a state of corruption (corruptio opinionum); the diseases of this type can arise only through a rejection of Reason (ex aspernatione rationis); hence, as distinguished from diseases of the body, mental diseases can never occur without guilt (sine culpa); and since this guilt is possible only for man who has Reason, the diseases do not occur in animals."

Ecce Cicero....

62 posted on 12/08/2002 7:01:16 PM PST by betty boop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Dumb_Ox
Are partisans of Second Realities like the denizens of Plato's Cave? And if so, isn't Voegelin simply restating Plato's metaphor in a less poetic fashion?

No, I don't think so, Dumb_Ox. The denizens of Plato's cave are clueless -- until they "turn around" and see that the Light is the Source of the "shapes" they have seen projected on the walls of their cave. (A major reorientation of the person is ordinarily implied by such a process.)

The images projected on the cave wall are only "fictions" of the Real, not even images of the real, but mere shadows of Reality. What Voegelin is suggesting is that certain denizens of the cave will take the "perigoge" -- they'll "turn around" to face the Light. But they will detest what they then see -- precisely because they have come to prefer the "shadows of Reality" to Reality itself -- and so rebel against the Light with every fiber of their being.

Voegelin is describing here, not "explaining." (How does one explain a thing like this, assuming only rational people are involved?)

63 posted on 12/08/2002 7:14:33 PM PST by betty boop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Perhaps I read something into it that was not there. But it struck me as "If you can't have a conversation with this kind of person because they don't believe - you might find common ground by approaching it this way: ..."
64 posted on 12/08/2002 7:15:55 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Dumb_Ox; betty boop
If I might add, Voegelin's word reality or (I presume) "human existence" lays great emphasis on participation, which is also from Plato, but I don't know whether the cave analogy suits that. Ironically, maro's post treats the tension produced by a participatory (rather than a static cosmic or universal) life.
65 posted on 12/08/2002 7:25:00 PM PST by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: cornelis; onedoug; betty boop
From the article (emphasis mine): The symbolism of the closed cosmos, which informs the fundamental concepts of classic and scholastic metaphysics, has been superseded by the universe of modern physics and astronomy.

You asked: Is that [the underlined phrase] a metaphor?

He could have meant the phrase as a metaphor in that context, but I take it literally, because the sense of self-importance can change as people become aware of physics and astronomy.

I do not find modern physics and astronomy to be a stumbling-block when reflecting on God. To the contrary, now more than ever, the heavens declare Him:

Physics News 4/27/2000

BEST MAP YET OF THE COSMIC MICROWAVE BACKGROUND (CMB)... The 36-member, international "Boomerang" (Balloon Observations of Millimetric Extragalactic Radiation and Geomagnetics) collaboration, led by Andrew Lange of Caltech and Paolo de Bernardis of the University of Rome, confirms that a plot of CMB strength peaks at a multipole value of about 197 (corresponding to CMB patches about one degree in angular spread), very close to what theorists had predicted for a cosmology in which the universe's overall curvature is zero and the existence of cold dark matter is invoked...

The shape of the observed pattern of temperature variations suggests that a disturbance very like a sound wave moving through air passed through the high- density primordial fluid and that the CMB map can be can be thought of as a sort of sonogram of the infant universe. (de Bernardis et al., Nature, 27 April 2000.)

Big Bang Evidence Found – 5/2/2001

"The early universe is full of sound waves compressing and rarefying matter and light, much like sound waves compress and rarefy air inside a flute or trumpet," explained Paolo deBernardis of the University of Rome La Sapienza, one of the members of the Balloon Observations of Millimetric Extragalactic Radiation and Geophysics (BOOMERanG) team. "For the first time the new data show clearly the harmonics of these waves."

Harmonics in the Early Universe – 6/5/2001

The MAXIMA, BOOMERANG, and DASI collaborations, which measure minute variations in the CMB, recently reported new results at the American Physical Society meeting in Washington, D.C. All three agree remarkably about what the "harmonic proportions" of the cosmos imply: not only is the universe flat, but its structure is definitely due to inflation, not to topological defects in the early universe.

The results were presented as plots of slight temperature variations in the CMB that graph sound waves in the dense early universe. These high-resolution "power spectra" show not only a strong primary resonance but are consistent with two additional harmonics, or peaks.

Cosmological Patterns and Galaxy Biasing (pdf)

Stability and Size of Galaxies from Planck’s Constant (PDF)

On a thread not too long ago somebody was wondering whether God had put His copyright on Creation. Could this be it? The Word tells us that He spoke it into being, "in the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and the Word was God." And God said "Let there be light!"

My view on Origins linked by onedoug at post #7 is based on such sound.

Again, in the "tiny" arena - genetics - I see His signature:

Yockey on Information Theory and Molecular Biology

and on abiogenesis

So it doesn't matter to me whether he meant it as a metaphor. I am not intimidated or dissuaded by science of any kind.

The only people I cannot "reach" with this information are atheist. To these it doesn't matter whether Creation occured 6,000 years ago or 15 billion years ago - neither are acceptable and they reject contrary evidence and reason as heresy.

66 posted on 12/08/2002 7:54:02 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; widowithfoursons
ad hominem. Homo, hominis, third declension. Accusative singular ends in "em."
67 posted on 12/08/2002 8:04:45 PM PST by maro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
The shape of the observed pattern of temperature variations suggests that a disturbance very like a sound wave moving through air passed through the high- density primordial fluid and that the CMB map can be can be thought of as a sort of sonogram of the infant universe.

Oh thank you for this, Alamo-Girl. It is amazing to think the entire universe somehow had its beginning in a Word Spoken by God. A real spoken Word, resonating with sound waves initiated by and emanating from the Speaker of the Word (which Word was the Logos of the "alpha and omega") -- from One Central Source, forever "outward"....

68 posted on 12/08/2002 8:19:38 PM PST by betty boop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: cornelis; maro
...maro's post treats the tension produced by a participatory (rather than a static cosmic or universal) life.

Agreed, cornelis. I was loving everything maro said -- 'til I came to his "conclusion." Which seemed to me to contradict his previous argument....

It seems we may have a case of "cognitive dissonance" here -- whether it be his or mine, I leave to the reader to judge for himself. Or maybe there's another explanation.... maro?

69 posted on 12/08/2002 8:26:18 PM PST by betty boop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
The Ultimate Unified Theory of Everything consists of: Photons, Croutons, Neurons, Futons, Carrions, Gravitons, Crayons, and Morons.
70 posted on 12/08/2002 8:29:45 PM PST by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
I'm so very, very glad that you find this as thrilling and meaningful as I do!

I just stumbled into this information a few days ago, which was rather embarrassing because I do love physics. But for the last few years I've had "other" priorities, i.e. the Downside Legacy.

71 posted on 12/08/2002 8:33:34 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Jimer
The Ultimate Unified Theory of Everything consists of: Photons, Croutons, Neurons, Futons, Carrions, Gravitons, Crayons, and Morons.

The Ultimate Uglified* Theory of Everything consists of: Photons, Croutons, Neurons, Futons, Carrions, Gravitons, Crayons, and Morons.

Morphons(evos)!

*...my addition!

72 posted on 12/08/2002 8:42:21 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
Just in case you might have an interest in this subject, FYI!!!

Boy, can we have fun with this one! Not tonight though. Thanks for the ping. I have to go read this and think about it. Just the skim gave rise to a whole pile of 'oh yeahs!'

73 posted on 12/08/2002 9:00:04 PM PST by LogicWings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
Thanks for the ping!
74 posted on 12/08/2002 9:03:21 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
BTW, does ANYone know what the "noetic structure of existence" is?

Noetic comes from the Greek word 'nous' which means mind, intellect.

75 posted on 12/08/2002 9:05:45 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
If you are referring to post 57, the mumbo jumbo in it is a QUOTE from Voegelin. If you think any of this stuff means anything, please state it in straight-forward fashion. P(X), P(Y), P(Z). I think Roger Scruton has proved that it is possible to restate philosophical arguments in simple, declarative sentences. By the way, I immediately suspect all "philosophical" writing that spends an inordinate amount of time dwelling on what other people wrote. That smacks of arguments from authority, and the days when a sentence from Aquinas or the Bible could defeat any rational argument.
76 posted on 12/08/2002 9:08:36 PM PST by maro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: ricpic
In laymans' terms isn't Voegelin saying that it is impossible to enter into dialogue with people hell bent on overthrowing "The Father?"

Not quite. What Voegelin is saying is that Aquinas could debate the Mohammedans because they at least shared a common ground - a belief in reason and also like himself a regard for Aristotle. The advocates of the '2nd reality' however reject not just Aristotle, but reason itself and even truth. The article is really an attack on materialism:

[I]f we remove…everything that smacks of cosmological symbolism, there remains as a piece de resistance the argument that a universe which contains intelligent beings cannot originate with a prima causa [first cause, prime mover] that is less than intelligent]….

77 posted on 12/08/2002 9:25:41 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: maro
This seems to be quite arrogant. The Soviets did just this; the enemies of communism were defined to be crazy and therefore put in insane asylums. And "noetic structure of existence" is nonsense.

What he means is something quite simple the Universe was intelligently designed by an intelligent being. It is not happenstance. While you are correct that the Communists called those who disagreed with them crazy and Voegelin is doing the same, the situation is different. The Communists called people crazy because they did not believe their lies. Voegelin is calling opponents crazy according to the proper definition of insanity - a complete dissociation from reality.

78 posted on 12/08/2002 9:43:24 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
The secret of Second Reality is that its denizens really do believe that they have the power to establish "laws" that are binding on everyone, regardless of whether "everyone" (or anyone) likes it or not. We call this: Compulsion. Coersion, Tyranny.

There's something else about the 2nd Reality - self-centeredness. The attack on God and morals is an attack on any authority except the self. It is the replacement of morals by the Machiavellian principle of 'the ends justifies the means'. Another variation of it is the Clintonian principle of 'if you can get away with it, it's not a crime'.

79 posted on 12/08/2002 9:59:04 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
I think you are saying that the Communists said that people were crazy who were not crazy, and that Voegelin says people are crazy who are crazy. My point is a structural one: it is dangerous to go around saying people who disagree with you (even profoundly) are crazy, because that assumption (1) makes the holder too smug in the rightness of his position and (2) creates the potential for very bad conduct by the soi-disant sane against the alleged crazies. Let us reserve medical judgments about craziness to their proper sphere, and keep intellectual disagreements in a different sphere altogether.
80 posted on 12/08/2002 11:09:01 PM PST by maro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-200 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson