.
other times I've said that on Sundays I usually have breakfast while I read Javier Marías on the last page of Country Weekly. Vengo doing it for years and I have a certain restlessness and a feeling of incompleteness those Sunday mornings where for some reason I do not, mostly because I have overstayed because in bed and there is no way to find it on the stands (read it on the internet is not the same.) Without doubt, a condition more like any other. Not always agree with what is said there. On this week Network nerds, is not the best, but worth reading, maybe I'm one of those suckers for there is concerned. As you also, that ye down here, with more ballots the regulars. User I'm not just twitter and facebook. But the blogosphere is not immune to this contamination narcissistic, exhibitionist, and why not say: mema, of which Mary speaks.
in recent time has been adding a new voice ritual coffee, orange juice and toast with sausage and ham, I hope that does not exploit this information to the robbers ransacked the house while breakfast. This is Javier Cercas, his article yesterday, What fools do not know , is one of the best I've read lately, I think is spot on: there can be no moral responsibility for the creative mind (for but despite more than a "new operator"). Nor morality without empathy.
The true creation can not be escape, or simply a reflection of narcissism. And hardly will be in "the network of memos, where empathy is as low as abundant the venom of the flock and the spirit of lynching.
And going to another issue I've been mulling over:
philosophy belongs to what some have called the language of second order or meta, a reflection aimed not so much the world, this would be a feature of empirical science, but our "talk" about the world. That is why some argue that the philosopher should be expert on other scientific fields, in which the real limits begin to philosophize, failing which his reflection is something merely vacuo and apparent. Is a possibility, and danger. But it is false if it is raised as the only way. Well forget that our "talk about the world does not end speeches academically objectified, whether natural or social sciences, arts, religion, politics or jurisdiction. There is an "experience" personal, and also it is worth reflecting . Such was the case of Socrates, Rousseau, Kierkegaard, or Nietzsche (which bind to the above, there were no suckers or just stupid) I also think that without that "experience"-and-personal perspective could any academic field elicit a distinctly philosophical reflection, that is, a limit experience.
But it's Sunday and time of anchovies. other times I've said that on Sundays I usually have breakfast while I read Javier Marías on the last page of Country Weekly. Vengo doing it for years and I have a certain restlessness and a feeling of incompleteness those Sunday mornings where for some reason I do not, mostly because I have overstayed because in bed and there is no way to find it on the stands (read it on the internet is not the same.) Without doubt, a condition more like any other. Not always agree with what is said there. On this week Network nerds, is not the best, but worth reading, maybe I'm one of those suckers for there is concerned. As you also, that ye down here, with more ballots the regulars. User I'm not just twitter and facebook. But the blogosphere is not immune to this contamination narcissistic, exhibitionist, and why not say: mema, of which Mary speaks.
in recent time has been adding a new voice ritual coffee, orange juice and toast with sausage and ham, I hope that does not exploit this information to the robbers ransacked the house while breakfast. This is Javier Cercas, his article yesterday, What fools do not know , is one of the best I've read lately, I think is spot on: there can be no moral responsibility for the creative mind (for but despite more than a "new operator"). Nor morality without empathy.
The true creation can not be escape, or simply a reflection of narcissism. And hardly will be in "the network of memos, where empathy is as low as abundant the venom of the flock and the spirit of lynching.
And going to another issue I've been mulling over:
philosophy belongs to what some have called the language of second order or meta, a reflection aimed not so much the world, this would be a feature of empirical science, but our "talk" about the world. That is why some argue that the philosopher should be expert on other scientific fields, in which the real limits begin to philosophize, failing which his reflection is something merely vacuo and apparent. Is a possibility, and danger. But it is false if it is raised as the only way. Well forget that our "talk about the world does not end speeches academically objectified, whether natural or social sciences, arts, religion, politics or jurisdiction. There is an "experience" personal, and also it is worth reflecting . Such was the case of Socrates, Rousseau, Kierkegaard, or Nietzsche (which bind to the above, there were no suckers or just stupid) I also think that without that "experience"-and-personal perspective could any academic field elicit a distinctly philosophical reflection, that is, a limit experience.
.
0 comments:
Post a Comment