Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:10:53 -0600 From: Daniel Dzenkowski <djdzenko-AT-students.wisc.edu> Subject: Re: god At 12:12 PM 10/30/98 -0500, Paul S. Rhodes wrote: >>I do not think that there is a paradox in N's case of God. Your Beckett's >>understanding comes from not having a sense that existence precedes the >>qualia. God would look like respectively as an effect that takes a form of >>**subsistence** in 'its' existence. A metamorphoses that has a degree of >>movement, an attribute of the univocity of being that met its destiny. >> >>God is dead!!! In its death, life returns >> >>amdib > >Geez, you academics are a humourless lot, aren't you? Academics don't know how to laugh, and isin't laughing of such a great importance when dealing with such dangerous thoughts. Dan --- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005