Written in the early days of the space race. Prabhupada declares the attempts reach the moon by space craft would fail and now it appears he was correct. Queen Kunti was a central figure in a war for the Indian throne. Through her sufferings she found wisdom and strength carrying her people through the crisis. We Respect Your Privacy! Free PDF Downloads. Prabhupada Vani Samadhi Microfiche from Bhaktivedanta Archives October 29th, by Madhudvisa dasa Microfiche of the Bhaktivedanta Archives collection of typed and hand written transcriptions of Prabhupada's lectures and conversations produced in.
The Flat Earth? For sure not spherichal. Arsh : Links are not working still. Atiniv M : Hare Krishna! She eats onion and garlic I will donate whatever little amount I can. I was recently reading about preaching and Srila The book provides key examples of social forms — including fashion, the secret and money — as exemplifications of this method.
The volume concludes with a reassessment of Simmel's relevance today. The attack on the World Trade Center in , followed by similarly dreadful acts of terror, prompted a new interest in the field of the apocalyptic. This book analyzes this continuously published literature and opens up a new perspective on these views of the apocalypse. The thirteen essays in this volume focus on the dimensions, consequences and transformations of Apocalypticism.
The authors explore the everyday relevance of the apocalyptic in contemporary society, culture, and politics, side by side with the various histories of apocalyptic ideas and movements. In particular, they seek to better understand the ways in which perceptions of the apocalypse diverge in the American, European, and Arab worlds. Leading experts in the field re-evaluate some of the traditional views on the apocalypse in light of recent political and cultural events, and, go beyond empirical facts to reconsider the potential of the apocalyptic.
This last point is the focal point of the book. This book has two objectives: to be a contribution to the understanding of Frege's theory of truth — especially a defence of his notorious critique of the correspondence theory - and to be an introduction to the practice of interpreting philosophical texts.
This philosophical work presents a unified theory of creation and evolution, a combination of Biblical themes and scientific knowledge. He examines objective spirit in three realms: the notion of right, the theory of society, and the state. This groundbreaking analysis will guide the study of Hegel and nineteenth-century political thought for years to come. There is an important truth of which thousands of men are ignorant; or if they know it, they reflect upon it seldom, and with but little fruit.
Yet the knowledge of this truth is almost as necessary for all those who have attained the age of reason, as the knowledge of the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation. The importance of this great truth seems to be a mystery not merely to the heathen, Jews and heretics, but even to the greater part of Christians; nay, even to many of those who have consecrated themselves to God.
We often hear in sermons, and read in pious books, of the necessity of avoiding bad company, of hating sin, of forgiving injuries, and of being reconciled to our enemies; but seldom are we taught this great truth, or, if it is sometimes spoken of, it is rarely done in a manner calculated to leave upon our minds a lasting impression of its great importance and necessity.
Now this important truth is, that according to the ordinary course of Divine providence, man cannot be saved without prayer. Whether a beginner or at the highest level of practice, learn Zen from one of the greatest masters of the twentieth century. Why practice Zen? What sets Zen apart from religion? What are its different practices? Through compelling stories and a systematic approach, he guides the reader through creating and sustaining a lifelong practice.
Warm and ecumenical in tone, Koun uses the insights of Zen to bring a deeper understanding of faith. Zen: The Authentic Gate is an easy-to-follow guide to creating an effortless and natural practice regardless of background, tradition, or religion.
In order to deeply understand a work of literature or film, one requires the emotional and spiritual experience of the sublime aesthetic power, through which one may glimpse the ultimate reality, as well as the thematic approach.
Through a meditative state, the reading or watching of such work would ultimately be a way of questing for spiritual enlightenment. The ability to arrange meaning into this pattern opens enquiry into its ontology, and presents meaning as closer to the sensation of colours or musical notes than the bivalent oppositions depicted in classical logic.
However, the experiment does not assert that this pattern suggests some sort of constant or absolute principle; instead, it theorises on the ways in which meaning can be considered to be recursive. To explain this, the book explores the concept of contrast itself. No exactitude on the precise existence of contrast can ever be struck because the answer varies infinitely depending upon the scale of measurement used to gauge the meeting point. This characteristic of contrast helps to define a whole new dimension from which sensation, meaning, cognition and consciousness can be analogised to the infinite forms between forms.
At a time when the widest consensus in philosophy is the exhaustion of its central themes, the significance of such a hypothesis provides fresh impetus to revise some of the key meanings and concepts underpinning contemporary thought. To do this, the method explores the opposing themes of idealism and realism that run throughout western philosophy from Plato to the Speculative turn.
This book will be of interest to professional academic audiences in the humanities and social sciences, from graduates to senior scholars. It will also be an interesting read to anyone wishing to keep abreast of developments in continental philosophy, epistemology, metaphysics, and the sociology of knowledge.
The book contains popular expositions accessible to readers with no more than a high school mathematics background on the mathematical theory of infinity, and a number of related topics. These include G? The material is approached from a variety of viewpoints, some more conventionally mathematical and others being nearly mystical. There is a brief account of the author's personal contact with Kurt G?
An appendix contains one of the few popular expositions on set theory research on what are known as "strong axioms of infinity.
On the New looks at the economies of exchange and valuation that drive modern culture's key sites: the intellectual marketplace and the archive.
As ideas move from one context to another, newness is created. This continuous shifting of the line that separates the valuable from the worthless, culture from profanity, is at the center of Boris Groys's investigation which aims to map the uncharted territory of what constitutes artistic innovation and what processes underpin its recognition and appropriation. Skip to content Close Menu Contact.
Vlastos, Platonic Studies Princeton, [] : For Williams, see Truth and Truthfulness. Instead, the world in itself is rejected by way of a denial of the possibility of a subjectivity that could take a position regarding such a world. With this denial in place, continued invocation of the world in itself is either an idle hypothesis or a matter of clinging surreptitiously to old ideals.
Against the idea of a selfless subject, Nietzsche argues that truth claims are ineradicably conditioned: by our physiological limitations and the selective apprehension of the world which derives from that; by our inherited values and presuppositions born by language, culture, and morality; and by our instinctual drives and needs. GM, Bk. Given this, the idea of an independent reality drops out as well. So we have a denial of the relation between subject and object that might ground absolutism.
There is no selfless subject; there is no independently existing reality; the appearance of a relation is simply the outcome of the process of assigning truth. The interpretation that sees Nietzsche as a type of pragmatist focuses on the relation between this critique of absolutism and his critique of a prudential justification of truthfulness.
For if truth is not justified metaphysically, then the question of the value of truth forces itself upon us. The will to truth requires a critique — let us thus define our own task — the value of truth must for once be experimentally called into question. It might seem that this questioning recommends a pragmatic attitude to truth.
If our truth-making is an expression of the will to truth, which is itself a servant of the will to power, then in questioning the will to truth we question the extent to which instances of truth-making truly serve the will to power. However, while there is clearly a pragmatic or ethical dimension to this questioning, Nietzsche is questioning the will to truth itself, the ascetic ideal, in the light of the fact that certain of our truths are a danger to us.
He asks whether this expresses a will not to deceive, or a will not to let oneself be deceived But why not deceive? Why not allow oneself to be deceived?
Note that the reasons for the former lie in a completely different area from those for the latter …. They affirm the ascetic ideal, and piety. Yet, the pious include Nietzsche himself. Nietzsche does not regard truthfulness lightly: At every step one has to wrestle for truth; one has had to surrender for it almost everything to which the heart, to which our love, our trust in life, cling otherwise. Philology is to be understood here in a very wide sense as the art of reading well — of being able to read off a fact without falsifying it by interpretation, without losing caution, patience, subtlety in the desire for understanding.
That is not a topic for this essay. So, for example, the section from the Gay Science to which I have referred ends with the question: But what if this [the faith that truth is divine] were to become more and more difficult to believe, if nothing more were to turn out to be divine except error, blindness, the lie — if God himself were to turn out to be our longest lie?
It is an ideal that he shares; it is an ideal that gives meaning to humans, but an ideal that, because it is disinterested, and otherworldly, is nihilistic. This paradox can be explicated by consideration of a self-referential paradox that seems to arise with regard to perspectivism.
We can take perspectivism to involve the claim that there is no statement such that it is true in all perspectives or false in all perspectives. We can take this claim to amount to a denial of absolutism. If true, the claim is true either perspectivally, or in all perspectives.
Now if we take it to be true in all perspectives, then there is a statement true in all perspectives, and absolutism is therefore true. Therefore, perspectivism must be perspectivally true. However, if perspectivism is true in not all perspectives, there are perspectives in which absolutism is true. Hales, and R. If it is true absolutely, then perspectivism is false.
However, perspectivally true absolutism — amounting to it not always being true that there is a statement that is true in all perspectives — seems inherently contradictory. If this analysis is right, for absolutism to be true anywhere, it must be true absolutely — in which case, again, absolutism is true for all perspectives. It is tempting to try to remove the appearance of paradox. I do not, however, think that this sort of response is appropriate.
That is, it is not a question of whether one of these approaches removes the paradox, but whether the paradox requires a resolution. Attempts to salvage perspectivism lessen its interest, and ignore its motivation. I suggest that the thesis of perspectivism is that all truth claims are intrinsically conditioned or perspectival, and that the thesis asserts this of itself.
Nietzsche himself is reasonably clear about this. I will try to show in the final section why this would be hopeless. Rather, we should take the paradox as showing us something important about the logic of a will to truth. We should, I think, see perspectivism as the culmination of the will to truth, and the position to which the will to truth returns.
One dimension of the will to truth is critical and self-critical — questioning, challenging, tapping the idols of existing philosophies and listening for the sound of their hollowness, demonstrating the all too human origins of absolute claims, providing genealogical alternatives to metaphysical rationalizations.
This critical activity is necessarily an activity of the will to truth; and this dimension of the will to truth, and its flowering in the naturalizing analyses that Nietzsche noted and engaged in himself, is what drives us towards perspectivism. We cannot in response adopt a knowing pose with regard to truth. For such a stance is in itself an expression of the will to truth — merely lacking honesty. No comfortable positions are available for us, since any position, and perspective, itself expresses the will to truth, and becomes a target for the will to truth.
This seems to be a difficult task. Clearly, there is an important contrast between Nietzsche and Plato, for in Plato there is an explicit absolutism regarding truth, and in the accompanying notion of Forms or ideas, we seem to be given an explicit metaphysical doctrine. On the other hand, that truth and its accompanying truthfulness which pertains to the world of the city, of mere appearance and partiality — that truth which does not rise above belief — does not have absolute value, but is instead evaluated in terms of its contribution to wellbeing.
We might say that here truthfulness is a pragmatic matter, but we do better, again, to see it in ethical terms, because of its relation to an ongoing process of the self and the state. In the city of the Republic, this second dimension the nurture of the state comes to the fore, and because of the overriding status of the grand project of the city, it subsumes consideration of the self, until self becomes the self of the Philosopher-Kings.
However, on whatever level we focus, we come upon the interrelated notions of health and unity or effective balance of structure. So to the Philosopher-King. The need for this character arises because mortals will fail to recognize the appropriate coincidence between self-interest and the good of the city as a whole.
That is, they cannot consider themselves and the city from the perspective of the Good. We would then be concerned with the relation between the self and its reasoning part. Republic b This possibility, of adopting a comparative relation between the Forms and artifacts, depends on the production through selection and training of individuals who come to have access to the Forms — to know the Good — and have the skills and nature to apply this knowledge administratively.
I will not detail this process here. The peculiarity of the character of the Philosopher-King lies in the thought that it is possible for Plato. The general problem has already been alluded to: the sort of access to the Forms required by the Philosopher-King is seemingly impossible for mortals, and clearly so in the other middle period dialogues — most explicitly in Symposium and Phaedrus.
Here, the value of the Forms is emphasized, and the value of a life which tends one towards the Forms. Yet humans are condemned to remain always lovers of the Forms, never acquaintances or companions, due to the fatal combination of mortal and immortal elements in their nature see Phaedrus, a—e.
It is true that in the Republic we are given techniques by which certain mortals might gain understanding, but this does not really ease the puzzlement. For the crucial aspect of their training that will enable the Philosopher-Kings to come to know the Forms is dialectic, and this is extraordinary. Dialectic, the Socratic elenchus , is not a method for discovering truth in an absolute sense. Instead, it may demonstrate the inconsistency of a set of beliefs, and perhaps clarify our usage or understanding of a concept.
This is the case throughout the Platonic corpus, and it retains this character when the style is reintroduced in the apparently late Philebus. Putting aside this contextual evidence, it seems in any case that the Philosopher- King has to maintain an inherently and unsustainably unstable division. The process of development that enables a philosopher to come to know the Good results in a specific nature, which can and must steadfastly maintain its gaze on the Good, and lives a life that supports this state.
Yet the Philosopher-King must also engage with falsehood and live his or her life in the world of the polis. That is, those qualities which may enable certain mortals to know the Good require both a practice in relation to the Good and an enabling style of life which rule out, and are ruled out by, the practices of Philosopher-Kings as administrators. Consider also that the justification of verbal falsehoods derives from our need for them given our lack of access to the Forms.
The Philosopher-Kings supposedly have that knowledge which would render such falsehood unnecessary — and presumably given the argument against gods being deceivers also unwarranted. I should mention an important qualification made there. First, there is no discussion of these rulers using falsehood; second, these godlike characters should be immune from the weakness which makes verbal falsehood useful for mortals but note their reliance on sense perception ; and third, the required nature of these characters outlined in Book 7 see esp.
It is always, as far as I know, assumed that the Philosopher-Kings do use verbal falsehoods, and I accept that assumption in the present discussion. See J. Seery, Conway and J. That is, the dual nature of the guardians is unsustainable and, given their role, this will destroy the balance of the city. Like Plato, Nietzsche raises the question of the value of truth. This means that Nietzsche has both an external anti-absolutist stance, and an internal stance, which must be absolutist, involving a metaphysical faith in truth.
Yet Nietzsche also emphasise the multiple realisations of the will to truth ascetic ideal and asks, not that we evaluate particular truths as a pragmatist interpreter might think , but that we evaluate different realizations of the ascetic ideal, and insists that we be sensitive to the ambivalent character of each realization.
So, while Nietzsche does not attach, from an external perspective, an intrinsic value to truth as such, he does value truthfulness.
There are, as I have suggested, two dimensions to this. On the one hand, dogmatic absolutism is life denying, because it attempts to halt the process of creating new perspectives and stultify the human tendency to be puzzled and to question. It must be overcome by a determination not to forget that we are merely human, creating limited human perspectives BGE, Preface.
0コメント