This is the big question. The more I read about it, the less I know. And the less I know, the more I read. It leads to so many other questions!
I have a copy of Being and Time, but have yet to attempt it. It is too much for me at this point in my journey. Thank you for explaining some of Heidegger's thinking so clearly.
I sometime take comfort in a quote that I thought was attributable to Kurt Vonnegut, but I could be wrong. "If we knew the answer, there wouldn't be any more questions." And yet, the quest continues... So it goes.
Thanks for your comment. It's the not- knowing that leads to understanding. The questions are what matters because there aren't many reliable answers. Now in my 80s I realize that curiosity is the great gift of life.
Of course, it's one thing write about 'being' and another just 'to be.' It's moving from the conceptual to the experimental- the great task which is no task. Thanks for your comment
I think you'd like to read some of Graham Oppy's thoughts on this question. He is one of the most renowed atheistic/naturalistic philosophers. His take on a necessarily existing first natural cause is very interesting. Also take a look até Joe Schmid commentaries and publications on this question for metaphysical accounts of a naturalistic First cause rather than a theistic one.
Thanks for your comment.
Thanks so much for this post!
This is the big question. The more I read about it, the less I know. And the less I know, the more I read. It leads to so many other questions!
I have a copy of Being and Time, but have yet to attempt it. It is too much for me at this point in my journey. Thank you for explaining some of Heidegger's thinking so clearly.
I sometime take comfort in a quote that I thought was attributable to Kurt Vonnegut, but I could be wrong. "If we knew the answer, there wouldn't be any more questions." And yet, the quest continues... So it goes.
Thank you!
Thanks for your comment. It's the not- knowing that leads to understanding. The questions are what matters because there aren't many reliable answers. Now in my 80s I realize that curiosity is the great gift of life.
Existence as such is void of ‘things’.
‘Things’ are perceptual abstractions which dull beasts perceive by ignoring the tree and seeing only the apples.
But separate apples don’t actually exist, just as separate waves don’t exist.
Only the ocean of being is actually present but ‘being’ is just another word for what cannot be addressed by any word or thought.
Tho strangely it is nothing but what is actually and always here and now.
Of course, it's one thing write about 'being' and another just 'to be.' It's moving from the conceptual to the experimental- the great task which is no task. Thanks for your comment
I think you'd like to read some of Graham Oppy's thoughts on this question. He is one of the most renowed atheistic/naturalistic philosophers. His take on a necessarily existing first natural cause is very interesting. Also take a look até Joe Schmid commentaries and publications on this question for metaphysical accounts of a naturalistic First cause rather than a theistic one.
I'll take a look. Thanks
Sometimes I believe that the world is all a dream.
That nothing exists actually
That the world is just a stage and we're the actors
This topics makes me realize that I'm not alone om this and I'm glad!
You're not alone. It's a theme revisited again and again in spiritual and philosophical circles. Thanks
Thanks for this subject Howard: Why does anything exist at all?
Quite wonderful.
I smiled at What Are Poets For? - it still feels like a live question.
And your sense that poetry (and art) reveals presence before explanation rings true to me.