Geoff wrote :
> i sent some rather dastardly and blackhearted comments to the list the other
> day, in response to some fairly "postmodernist" comments made by a colleague,
> and have felt fairly guilty ever since; my comments were not meant to ridicule
> the individual in question's argument, nor any failings on his use of a
> second language, but were rather aimed at the rather opaque academic jargon he
> used to express himself (as a result of which, i must admit i was not altogether
> sure just what the fuck he was on about)
> is it my imagination or is academeze on the comeback? can i blame it on
> foucault (i like to blame most things on foucault) and other french
> pseudo-philosophers who think more about being fancy stilists than presenting
> content, or... has it really always been there and i just missed out during my
> recent wilderness years?
well, I've always felt you to be a rather dastardly and blackhearted individual,Geoff.
but none the less lovable for that. I've just been accused of being malicious and
misanthropic, on another list. I'm rather enjoying trying on that persona for size.
If I'm thinking of the post you have in mind, surely, out on the wild frontiers of
human inquiry, much is opaque and obscure. We need brave souls to step over
the boundary and report back. The fact that the messages we receive appear
somewhat odd, is to be expected. Where else can we advance, but into the
Personally, I think, hope, that I did understand exactly what was meant.
I think that some day soon, someone is going to be able to stitch science, philosphy
and culture, and mystical insights, into a whole which ties together in a
manner which is coherent and intellectually satisfying. The ' in here / out there'
perplexity, is one which will have to be resolved, for that synthesis to occur.
Who knows, perhaps someone subscribing to this list will be the one who pulls
off that feat ? I guess that folk who scrabble around in the dirt seeking God, are
as well suited to the task as any. Perhaps the snippet below may help, or just
cause more malicious, blackhearted, wicked, off-topic confusion ?
> The Jesuit priest William Johnston went to meditate in a
> Japanese Zen monastery.
> After sitting for some time his legs began to ache terribly.
> The master gave him some advice on this, and then asked him
> what practise he was following in his meditation.
> Johnston replied that he was sitting silently in the presence
> of God without words or thoughts or images or ideas.
> The master asked if his God was everywhere,and when he replied
> yes,asked if he was 'wrapped around in God'.The answer was
> "And you experience this ? ", asked the master.
> "Yes" , said Johnston.
> "Very good,very good", said the master "Continue this way.Just keep on.
> Eventually you will find that God will disappear and only Johnston remain".
> Johnston was deeply shocked by this remark because it sounded like a denial
> of all that he had thought of as sacred. He decided to contradict the master,
> and said,smilingly "God will not disappear. But Johnston might well disappear
> and only God be left".
> "Yes,yes" said the master,smiling "That's what I mean. It is the same thing!".