Sure. Wholly wasn’t my expectation, not remotely. I wasn’t hoping for something complete. I thought it was clear my request was for something small, a single quote, but one that had affected you in some way you considered important or gave you insight or whatever made you want to keep reading this guy and not spend time in some other way.
I tend to agree.
I actually doubt that, but There’s an irony in you saying this.
And this wasn’t the irony I meant.
Sure. I got that. Other people explain their thoughts, sometimes clearly, sometimes cryptically. Sort of like I am asking for you to do here. You find use in hearing them lay out their positions. This doesn’t mean you no longer find use in cryptic language.
OK. And I assume it is workign for you to repeat this as much as you do.
Or you could help feed the poor or give someone a massage or do some other thing. There are many kinds of interactions with others out there. it seems an almost clinical irony to choose to write philosophy if one is fundamentally a nihilist about meaning. Sure, feeding the poor might also be meaningless, but somehow the seeming concreteness of this interaction with others, given the skepticism about communication, seems like a plus that is being avoided for some reason. Or whatever more concrete activity seems more interesting/attractive. They come, they eat. Perhaps what this means to you is one thing, to them another, but since there is something beyond meaning in the interaction, who cares?
IOW when feeding a hungry person there is an interaction even if the meaning is different or even if it is meaningless.
But when communication is the intended interaction, then there is no interaction if you guys are right.
But you both choose to work in the most vulnerable form.
It is different. If you think performing this other kind of communication with me would stain the exchange you are having with Luno, then I understand your reluctance, though not the causes of the staining. But here’s the thing. You are not having an exchange with Luno. Yes, I did note the quotation marks. You are writing in a public setting, I presumed, for third parties to witness and participate. You are not making notes at home in pads or in your computer. I was interested enough to try to get read a number of these quotes, react to some - was a little surprised to get no reaction to my response to him - and then try to see what was happening for you in a way that might be useful for me, since I seemed to be missing something in this guy, a certain depth. Of course you are free to decline, but your wording and reaction here seems as if you do not understand that you are speaking in public. It seems like you are reacting more as if I entered your private space and eavesdropped on a private process.
I said great for you. I have also worded this in a number of different ways - a rather large number of ways - to try to keep it flexible what the value his writing may have for you, even keeping the options more broad than ‘value’. Now you focus on ‘great’ as if I have boxed you in.
Also, I don’t think great implies ethical goodness, but that’s me.
If I quoted someone as much as you have quoted him in a forum where the idea of threads is for others to join in and interact, this would mean I placed some importance or value in at least the interaction - add in some of my other ways of wording this. My recent interest has been in trying to find out what that importance is.
I don’t think this is strange. IOW my request can make sense in the context and make sense for me, but frankly your response, despite your whole dasein spiel has more of an ‘there’s is something wrong with this request’ edge to it.
If you are treating his writing as a purely aesthetic experience than I agree. I think philosophy tends to have content in a way that music does not.
I can treat a postage stamp as if it was a music, but then for me it is not a postage stamp anymore. If someone asks about its postagestampness when you post a thread about it in a stamp collecting website, I think they would be surprised to hear you say that describing how it functions as a postage stamp would damage your relatioship with the postagestamp as music. I mean, this is a philosophy forum. Just to let you know the context that is part of what is leading me to ask for something more specific in addition to what you are doing here.
I am treating his work as if it was philosophy, which generally means the ideas can be brought out and discussed, even if this is in a context where it is acknowledged that this is incomplete and partially subjective interpretation, etc.
WEll, again no. Unless he is a poet. But even poems I can explain what I am getting out of them. Part of it. Some of it. Approximations. Without implying I capture the whole or that I even capture the whole of what the poem is doing with in for me. Also, I already related ideas about poems, but there is no response to those. It is as if they never happened.
Nope. And I repeatedly made it clear I wasn’t doing this. I have repeatedly respected your process here, affirmed the place of crypticness and ambiguity. It seems like asking for something in addition means that I am rejecting what is there, to you. You can have both. Or, one can. If someone can only have one, they can say this. But the request and even finding value in both does not mean I am rejecting one.
I can read a poem, let its meaning glide through me without trying to paraphrase, simply as experience. I can then also spend time discussing the poem in other ways - some of these while more explicit and language based, need not be logical - and then can even go back and experience the poem as, well, a neo sensual experience of images sounds and meanings as sensed things.
I do not see one destroying the other, necessarily. I can do this with movies, paintings, even relationships…
If it would destroy it for you, well, again, I understand your reluctance. But you seem to keep taking my request as a denial of the value of what you are doing, as an attempt to supplant or replace. That just isn’t the case.
Well, of course. And that you are saying this to me is really confusing. This has been my point all along.
OK. And I do see this as the closest you come to meeting my request. I wish it was attached to a specific quote.
What volumes does it speak? Do you think my giving up means I think one can have a complete and perfect objective exchange? So if I give up it means I am giving up because this is not happening?
I give up on processes that go nowhere for some time or cause me pain without some benefit for some time, as assessed via intuition or feelings or even seeming demonstrated somehow, whatever. Some people are so unpleasant to deal with, so far, that I have put them on ignore.
The volumes my giving up seemed to speak to you were not about me. Of course, I may be wrong when I decide to no longer engage in a process. But life is making these decisiosn of what to continue and what not to. But I am pretty sure you projected ideas you have about ‘other people’ onto me. And whole volumes of projection, it seems, these conclusions about what my giving up means about me and my beliefs.
If you manage to maintain ongoing discussion contact with everyone regardless of how it feels and where the contact seems to go, well, more power to you. I haven’t noticed you doing this in these forums and it seems like you give up on certain exchanges, but I haven’t put in scientific research. Me, I simply don’t have the time and also I feel/think it is important to make choices. In the past I have maintained contact that wore me down, or led to other experiences I did not really wish to have. So I make choices about what I will continue and what I will not. Fallibly, in all liklihood, but from my side of our gap, I can’t see a way to avoid making these choices, so I want to make them better and consciously. In the past when I let painful useless ones continue, i was choosing not to have other experiences with other people.
I have said nothing to indicate I have this belief. I am pretty sure I have said things that go against this.
I got exasperated when your responses had little to do with my request. When you implied I was saying what you were doing was wrong, when in fact I specifically said I did not think so. There comes a point where I am pretty sure I have specifically addressed concerns in a clear way and the other person keeps responding to me as if I haven’t said the things I have or attributes positions to me I have not stated and I get pissed. And from there I figure this feeling is likely to poison the exchange. So, sure I give up. Some times I come back.
I am not really interested, right here, in how you feel others incorrectly get exasperated with you. I am quite sure many things cannot be gotten, and once that is on ground level with specific individuals, it is most things that cannot be gotten by individual A. Any individual. And then there is the added ‘cannot be gotten when explained to them by individual B.’ So I believe that what can be gotten is actually a very tiny subset of things. So a little irritation comes in that you are sort of talking to me here or perhaps through me about problems you have with other people and maybe you realize this has nothing to do with me or maybe you don’t, maybe you assumed it applied to me as it seems you assumed a number of thigns about me above, maybe you didn’t.
But I feel like in your own way you saw me as in a box I don’t think I am in and took my request as a kind of judgment (a negative one) of what you were doing.
I’d prefer not to analyze a quote of his and what it did for me in that way.
or some other statement expressing a preference would likely have worked rather well with me. Not that you could know this.
I suppose ultimately that wasn’t my experience on this issue. It felt like you were responding to someone else.
You mention a number of times about how other people react to you, here in this post. This says to me that my request was taken by you in this broader context where you feel attacked or the focus of negative responses from others.
This, to me, could explain my experience. That my request was seen as a criticism of your position(s) and part of a larger pattern. My experience that you seemed not to be quite responding to me, what my request was, what it meant, what it meant about me and my thoughts. This was on the unpleasant side.
I couple this with what seems like your conception of the thread as really a private exchange between you and Luno - which is how you described it above. You did not use the word private, but nowhere in the description is anyone else.
It did feel like I was reacted to as an intruder.
I can only say this is not a private space, and I think there is a kind of etiquette mis-noticing on your part - of the culture of a forum.
But now I know that this is a thread for an exchange between you and Luno and I will disintrude and please consider my request withdrawn.