Fall 2009
Classes begin at this university tomorrow. It's nice to be in a situation where all you have to take, and all you are expected to take, are courses in your area of interest. It's also nice when there isn't a single textbook in the list. Included in this semester's reading are such things as
Heidegger: Being and Time
Merleau-Ponty: Phenomenology of Perception
Kant: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Moral
Nietzsche: On the Genealogy of Morals
Plato: Gorgias
De Beauvoir: The Second Sex
and so on. I don't know for sure which and how many will be read to completion, so I can't say what I might cover on here. I'm also taking a survey in contemporary analytic metaphysics, but the articles are smaller and it's not really my area, so we'll see if I do anything with that.
In other news, I did what an English professor friend told me to do and read a novel called The Shack. It's essentially a Christian novel heavy on the theodicy. The professor is well-meaning, but I don't think she realizes how completely godless I am; only a Tillich could give me credit for faith. To keep myself interested I was planning to write something up for it here, and have notes for such a purpose. However, I think that will be a no-go, partly this is because I really don't have the time to do what I would consider a substantial enough write up and then revise it. It's low on my priority list, I guess because it didn't "change my life" as it did for others. Suffice to say I wasn't converted. It's well done for its purpose, and I can see the effect it would have on those who aren't interested in analysis, but if anything that would put me off. Besides, unless your theodicy can explain how human sin is the sole reason for the existence of war, autism, sudden infant death syndrome, ignorance, and the mosquito (especially the mosquito), among other things, I'm not buying it.
Heidegger: Being and Time
Merleau-Ponty: Phenomenology of Perception
Kant: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Moral
Nietzsche: On the Genealogy of Morals
Plato: Gorgias
De Beauvoir: The Second Sex
and so on. I don't know for sure which and how many will be read to completion, so I can't say what I might cover on here. I'm also taking a survey in contemporary analytic metaphysics, but the articles are smaller and it's not really my area, so we'll see if I do anything with that.
In other news, I did what an English professor friend told me to do and read a novel called The Shack. It's essentially a Christian novel heavy on the theodicy. The professor is well-meaning, but I don't think she realizes how completely godless I am; only a Tillich could give me credit for faith. To keep myself interested I was planning to write something up for it here, and have notes for such a purpose. However, I think that will be a no-go, partly this is because I really don't have the time to do what I would consider a substantial enough write up and then revise it. It's low on my priority list, I guess because it didn't "change my life" as it did for others. Suffice to say I wasn't converted. It's well done for its purpose, and I can see the effect it would have on those who aren't interested in analysis, but if anything that would put me off. Besides, unless your theodicy can explain how human sin is the sole reason for the existence of war, autism, sudden infant death syndrome, ignorance, and the mosquito (especially the mosquito), among other things, I'm not buying it.
posted by Derek at 10:40 PM
3 Comments:
The Shack? That's one I hadn't heard of. I wonder how long it'll take a relative to get that one in front of me?
It's definitely not made to target people such as ourselves; in fact, by page 40 I summed it up internally as a guide for lapsed Catholics to enter into non-institutional Christianity, and I think that largely held throughout (though I will admit that, perhaps, Catholics weren't the only audience). It is good at what it does, and offers some interesting arguments at times, but won't impress those who aren't looking to be impressed in some sense, if you get what I mean.
I had a similar reaction to The Case for Christ. It's target audience didn't include us but those who, paraphrasing you, are looking to be impressed in some sense. I wonder if that's common for these popular apologetics books.
Post a Comment
<< Home