Author Topic: Physics of River Channels (Read 1682 times)

raul · « **Reply #30 on:** May 18, 2017, 08:05:19 pm »

Herr Holden,
Maybe that´s s why we are here, to do some penance here. After all this is a prison or human farm where being born here is punishment. To the thugs in power we are just food for them. They laugh at us all the time. The gods laugh at the sufering of a baby with AIDS, a prisoner being tortured in prison, an old man collecting used cans of beer in order to sell them for a few coins, a girl selling her body, etc.etc. The gods just look on. From the moment we,humans, come here, the butchery starts. Of course, we,the sheep,will thank God or the gods for the better sleep we enjoys after the process of self-deception in thinking we are the jewel of creation.
Mark Twain

Holden · « **Reply #31 on:** May 18, 2017, 10:01:32 pm »

The original sin-I mean,the way Schopenhauer used the phrase.

Nation of One · « **Reply #32 on:** May 18, 2017, 10:58:41 pm »

So, by original sin you mean "existential guilt"?

While searching, I found an essay called, "Schopenhauer's Theory of Tragedy" on a server in India, of all places.

I have always been hostile toward this concept of sin, but as you mention, Schopenhauer uses this term, original sin, to be equivalent to existential guilt, the madness we inherit upon being born into this word, and not having anything to do with any personal flaws or character defects of our individuality.

Although Christian Tragedies can never reach the heights of the Opera Norma, Schopenhauer prefers them to Greek tragedies. In his view, tragedy gives us profound insight into the nature of human existence. We realise that what the hero pays for is not his sin but the original sin —- the sin or the guilt of having ever been born in this world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

A true knowledge of original sin or existential guilt is, according to him, the core of tragedy. The Christian doctrine points out the terrible truth that sin was present in the universe even before the fall of Adam and Eve, and gave birth to many miseries and turmoils to ever characterise the lives of men.

At this point, Schopenhauer argues that the fate which a tragic hero meets is perhaps on account of man's existential guilt and not because of a flaw in his character. His view differs from Aristotle's who points out that an ideal tragic hero is involved in misfortune not as a result of deliberate vice but because of some flaw in his character or some error of judgement.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In "Life a Dream" Calderon the poet expresses the same view when he says :
For the greatest crime of man is that he ever was born.

The origin of sin in the human family concerns both rich and poor, high and low. For this reason, Schopenhauer in his Essay "On the Suffering of the World" suggests that because of existential guilt and the suffering of one and all, man should not be addressed as "Monsieur, Sir, Mein Herr, but my fellow sufferer".

Schopenhauer argues that tragedy does not demand for poetic justice. He disagrees with Dr. Johnson who looks for poetic justice in some plays of Shakespeare.
According to Schopenhauer, existential guilt makes a hero face life's tragedy for :
it is not his own individual sins that the hero atones for, but original sin, i.e. the crime of existence itself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Job says that 'man is born into trouble' , he speaks of original sin.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is through the misfortune of the hero that the spectator is made aware of the futility of life.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The misery which he perceives when the veil of Maya is lifted gives him a direct knowledge of the Will in all its manifestations. This knowledge reveals man's vain strivings and continual suffering. The dismal picture brought before him drives away his will to live.

Holden · « **Reply #33 on:** May 18, 2017, 11:46:46 pm »

Schopenhauer, for one, in The World as Will and
Representation, asserts as self-evident that original sin is at the centre of
Christianity: ‘The great truth that really constitutes the heart of Christianity is
the doctrine of original sin (affirmation of the will) and redemption (denial of
the will); whereas everything else is mostly only wrapping and covering, or
simply accessories.

In PP he reiterates his basic definition of Christianity: ‘Augustinianism, with its
dogma of original sin and all that is connected with it, is . . . real Christianity,
properly understood.

Cioran , like Schopenhauer, fastens on original sin as Christianity’s crown jewel:
The eminent cleric was poking fun at original sin. ‘That sin is your meal ticket.
Without it, you’d die of hunger, for your ministry would then no longer have any
meaning. If man is not fallen from the very beginning, why did Christ come? to
redeem whom and what?’ To my objections, his only response was a condescending
smile.
A religion is finished when only its adversaries try to preserve its integrity.

It is arguably the Augustinian interpretation of original sin which is under attack when Nietzsche makes his strident criticism of Christian attitudes to sexual relations: ‘It was only Christianity, with ressentiment against life in its foundations, which made of sexuality something impure; it threw filth on the beginning, on the prerequisite of our life . . .’ In this context it is of some interest to see Nietzsche throwing the dogma of the Immaculate Conception into the fray in support of his case

{∅, {∅}, {∅, {∅}}} : Rage Against the Meat Grinder

News:

Author Topic: Physics of River Channels (Read 1682 times)

raul

Re: Physics of River Channels

Holden

Re: Physics of River Channels

Nation of One

Original Sin?

Holden

Re: Physics of River Channels