| steven787 said: Sorry to rain on your parade but you missed a key philosophical argument. That's the inability to differentiate between the lack of understanding about a subjective idea and the capacity to understand an objective element of reality. ;) (BTW, I have no idea what you're talking about, I am not a philosopher. I hate esoteric conversations in general but I know why you did that. Philosophers are amusing, "because I made up a long word to describe a situation, that means I invented the idea of analyzing that situation.") |
Well, if you want to explore the tension between the subjective and the objective, that's just fine. At this point I'm not sure that apollose made it clear that he wanted to saunter down that garden path. ;)
That sentence of yours that I bolded does capture a lot of the essence of what Greek philosophy was about and why I majored in it and learned a bunch of ancient greek. That is also what Nietzsche was most interested in, he was first an etymologist, not a philosopher. Heidegger was drawn to the same thing, i.e., trying to draw the meaning out of a word in its first and crudest sense and trying to understand what it was like for a person to first use a word in a particular context, e.g., the word "being" or "existence" used in an abstract manner to describe itself. Parmenides and Heraclitus are the two favorites in this type of philosophy with Socrates/Plato a distant second. But I digress... Pope is poopy head.
