Earwa > General Earwa

On the Nature of the No-God

<< < (12/12)


--- Quote from: sciborg2 on January 08, 2020, 01:39:25 am ---Nice! I had posited something similar among the Westerosi, that the bleakest but arguably most interesting ending would be the shearing of souls from bodies. So everyone on Earwa, due to Physicalist Closure or at least Closure from the Outside, thinks they are saved from damnation even as their actual souls are being tormented forever in Hell.
--- End quote ---

Well, in one way, they are "saved" if it is the case that "language is the Dasein of Spirit" and the Outside is a constitutive intersubjective "plane" of that Spirit, then an enforced materialism might well "remove" the Soul.  Does the Outside exist as an "in-itself" whereby it would "exist" if not as an inter-subjective "for-themselves?"

I'd think Bakker's answer might be a no, if we take the line of thinking that the Outside, Spirit, Soul, are sort of "derivative" of the illusory nature of the experience of consciousness.  However, on the same account, it could just be that despite an enforcing of a normative materialism by some mechanism, that the heuristic nature of consciousness would give rise to Spirit no matter what.  Perhaps this sort of thing is what Bakker is weighing for and against in the next series.

I realize that I tend to drop what are essentially non-sequiturs here, but as a disorganized mind as mine is, that is the best I can do at the moment.  I came across this though:

--- Quote ---But in the second place, “the concept does not only have being within itself implicitly – it is not merely that we have this insight but that the concept is also being explicitly. It sublates its subjectivity itself and objectifies itself. Human beings realize their purposes, i.e., what was at first only ideal is stripped of its one-sidedness and thereby made into a subsisting being. … When we look closely at the nature of the concept, we see that its identity with being is no longer a presupposition but a result. What happens is that the concept objectifies itself, makes itself reality and thus becomes the truth, the unity of subject and object” (LPR 3:356). The concept, like the human “I,” is alive and active; its activity can be called a drive, and every satisfaction of a drive is a sublation of the subjective and a positing of the objective (LPR 1:438–439)
--- End quote ---

LPR refers to Hegels Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion.  Of course, I am linking this, in my mind, to what the Dunsult tell us about how the No-God is, to them, the Absolute, a unity of Subject and Object.  In Hegel's terms, this seems to mean it would be Pure Being, which might be a hint as to why it invalidates the Outside and so sin.  That is, in Pure, Immediate Being, meaning is also Immediate.  There is no mediating term of an Eternal perspective.  Everything simply is what it is, there is never any true Becoming, it is all just Material doing whatever it is that Material does.


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version