tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764506766343254616.post3559943133750540007..comments2024-03-26T14:20:38.103-04:00Comments on The Thought Criminal: Ecclesiastes Proceeds to Mention Great Sins and Cries Out That Avarice is the Root Of All Evil.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764506766343254616.post-4097178249778937592020-04-14T09:38:22.518-04:002020-04-14T09:38:22.518-04:00I found it, here.
http://www.hestories.info/comme...I found it, here.<br /><br />http://www.hestories.info/commentary-on-ecclesiastes-by-gregory-of-nyssa--introduction.html?page=4The Thought Criminalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01381376556757084468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764506766343254616.post-89172871164841735842020-04-13T21:14:14.133-04:002020-04-13T21:14:14.133-04:00Thanks! I tried a number of searches but to no ava...Thanks! I tried a number of searches but to no avail. Appreciate your help!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764506766343254616.post-66242824439506655982020-04-12T21:11:37.707-04:002020-04-12T21:11:37.707-04:00I'm sorry, I can't find my notes for this ...I'm sorry, I can't find my notes for this post. I don't remember where I got it. I know I have it on a thumb drive somewhere and will look for it. The Thought Criminalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01381376556757084468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764506766343254616.post-30595802339014548842020-04-12T19:39:59.219-04:002020-04-12T19:39:59.219-04:00That is a terrific translation of Gregory's fo...That is a terrific translation of Gregory's fourth homily on Ecclesiastes. Would you be so kind as to give me its source? Thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764506766343254616.post-25760529193023328782015-02-06T12:55:08.070-05:002015-02-06T12:55:08.070-05:00Continental philosophers (Wittgenstein, Derrida, V...Continental philosophers (Wittgenstein, Derrida, Vattimo, Levinas) are much more comfortable discussing religion, even if they are not themselves religious. Anglo-American philosophers seem to think any indication they have any knowledge of theology at all makes them suspect as proselytes and probably betrayers of the cause of empiricism.<br /><br />I've found theologians know much more about philosophy than Anglo-American philosophers do, while Continental philosophers are quite comfortable discussing theology. They don't seem to think knowledge of it equals approval; but the A-A school seems to fear being seen even taking religion seriously.<br /><br />And that all trickles down to the kids in the sandbox, rather like the ignorance of history becomes near-scientific fact, as Lessl pointed out.Rmjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06811456254443706479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764506766343254616.post-23654946737208517252015-02-06T11:17:15.814-05:002015-02-06T11:17:15.814-05:00I am regretting ever more that my education had no...I am regretting ever more that my education had nothing written by theologians in it, a tiny bit of Aquinas and a few others excepted. You don't have to agree with everything someone says, how many entirely secular, academic writers can someone agree with entirely. I am rather shocked to find how good so much of it is and how valuable it is. I remember when that movie about the British abolitionist effort came out about ten years ago, now many of even the better online "secularists" where whining and crying about it being, somehow, unfair to point out that all of those people were Christians, ignoring that their arguments were based on the scriptures. It was about the same time that I started looking at the claims of the online atheists and finding, to my shock, now much of the common received "knowledge" I'd gotten was as much a lie as any fundamentalist line of factoids anyone could name. Even some of my former heroes were thick in it, Bertrand Russell, lots and lots of other British, French and American thinkers I'd been taught to revere were outright liars. In the case of Russell, I think he was a knowing liar who, the more I read of him and put his invective into the context of his career and biography, the more petty it all seemed. And the best of neo-atheists are nothing compared to them.<br /><br />I'm hoping to take a good look at Stephen Jay Gould's accusation against Tielhard de Chardin, what I've read so far leads me to believe that even Gould was guilty of that kind of thing in service to his ideological interests. And there aren't any of the above I respect more than I have Gould. His "evidence" was so bad that I can't believe anything but animosity could have led him to write what he did. The Thought Criminalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01381376556757084468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4764506766343254616.post-91076248365007161052015-02-06T09:32:22.260-05:002015-02-06T09:32:22.260-05:00Thank you for this. I'm going to have to read...Thank you for this. I'm going to have to read Gregory's words slowly, and meditate on them. Far better than most of the stuff I find on the intertoobs.<br /><br />I was reading an essay on Levinas and Kierkegaard last night, an essay that includes this sentence:<br /><br />"For 'absolute alterity' turns out to be an 'absolute disturbance' to every order, semantic or social, by means of which human reason seeks to makes itself lord of the earth."<br /><br />And this, a bit further on:<br /><br />"The distinguishing mark of this thought is that it radically disturbs the thoughts by which we construct the worlds of nature and history."<br /><br />There is a great deal more of interest there than in the blatherings on-line about "Bronze Age mentality." I find it now, reading it again, to be of a piece with Gregory. Not that Gregory would agree necessarily with Levinas and this essay, but that they are speaking the same language, and reasoning in the same way; a language and a reasoning completely alien to the "reasonable" New Atheists.Rmjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06811456254443706479noreply@blogger.com