Or, to follow up on Steve's question, are you talking about a Kantian notion
of transcendental idealism? I guess the question is really what you mean by
"transcendence".
Alan
[log in to unmask] wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Hyden <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sunday, November 08, 1998 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: gentlemen?
>>Bryan, please define "higher nature."
>
>Sure Corey. We are of a higher nature because we are self-aware. Now, the
>language gets a little slippery here because someone could argue that
>there's no way of knowing whether or not animals (for instance) are
>self-aware. So I'll use different language. Human's are the only earthly
>possesors of 'free-will'. I mean we have free-will in the sense that we
can
>trancend the physical world. We are not of this earth. We are not our
>bodies.
If we are "not of this earth," what are we of? "Transcend the physical
world"? How? Sorry, but you've really lost me here. Are you talking
trascendentalism as in eastern religions or what?
Steven J. Bissell
http://www.du.edu/~sbissell
http://www.responsivemanagement.com
Our human ecology is that of a rare species of mammal
in a social, omnivorous niche. Our demography is one of
a slow-breeding, large, intelligent primate.
To shatter our population structure, to become abundant
in the way of rodents, not only destroys our ecological
relations with the rest of nature, it sets the stage
for our mass insanity.
Paul Shepard
____________________________________________________________________
More than just email--Get your FREE Netscape WebMail account today at http://home.netscape.com/netcenter/mail
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|