Comments on: Schopenhauer on death

By: Enlightenment: Coming to Peace with One’s End « Dianoilogos

Enlightenment: Coming to Peace with One’s End « Dianoilogos — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:53:46 +0000

[...] http://darwiniana.com/2009/11/07/schopenhauer-on-death/ [...]

By: Darwiniana » Comment: sould beliefs, and ancient testimony

Darwiniana » Comment: sould beliefs, and ancient testimony — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:36:11 +0000

[...] Comments nemo on Schopenhauer on deathEnlightenment: Coming to Peace with One’s End | dianoeidos on Schopenhauer on deathPaul [...]

By: nemo

nemo — Tue, 12 Jul 2011 16:57:23 +0000

Luke, the question of soul is a permanent stalemate, and it is futile to start preaching scientific fundamentalism on the subject. I am well aware of the problems with soul beliefs, but that doesn’t make their core out to be false. Again, the thinking of Kant can help here. In general we are stuck: in we affirm soul we end in confused beliefs, if we negate it, we end with an equally false view of man.

By: Enlightenment: Coming to Peace with One’s End | dianoeidos

Enlightenment: Coming to Peace with One’s End | dianoeidos — Tue, 12 Jul 2011 03:55:32 +0000

[...] http://darwiniana.com/2009/11/07/schopenhauer-on-death/ [...]

By: Darwiniana » Soul talk and positivistic failure mode

Darwiniana » Soul talk and positivistic failure mode — Sat, 08 May 2010 17:16:10 +0000

[...] in the twinkling of an eye, most prodigiously via the unwitting efforts of great philosophers. Schopenhauer on death But the issue here in a Kantian vein is not arguing for the existence of soul so much as realizing [...]

By: Darwiniana » Link to Schopenhauer on death

Darwiniana » Link to Schopenhauer on death — Mon, 03 May 2010 18:13:39 +0000

[...] can help to see how easy it is to create a better understanding of the ’soul’ question: Schopenhauer on death Schopenhauer didn’t really believe in ’souls’, but the framework of [...]

By: nemo

nemo — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 18:49:34 +0000

That’s a good question. We don’t know the answer, but I would suggest being careful of ‘spiritual’ psychologies here. But then again scientific ones will deny the existence of this realm.

By: dandy

dandy — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:52:51 +0000

How would you call the those parts of the being behind and parallel with the physical body, normally invisible to the naked eye and not even supposed to actually exist according to some scientific views (such as emotions), called the five lower centers, of which only one is plainly visible to the senses (the instinctive center). Do you think it is possible that the thing-in-itself for how we perceive a man to be (the representation of a body) is the system of five lower centers described in Gurdjieff teaching, which includes emotions, thoughts, movements, instincts and sex (behind which there may be essence and/or soul)?

By: Darwiniana » Schopenhauer and transcendental idealism

Darwiniana » Schopenhauer and transcendental idealism — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:20:28 +0000

[...] Comment on Schopenhauer and death jim buck said, January 13, 2010 at 7:10 pm · ‘Schopenhauer’s perspective, or rather that of his transcendental idealism, is not about a soul or reincarnation, but a framework that stands beyond representation, related to the framework of will. That is not a psyche. ‘ [...]

By: Darwiniana » Atheist confusion over afterlife beliefs

Darwiniana » Atheist confusion over afterlife beliefs — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:08:47 +0000

[...] Comment on Schopenhauer on death James said, January 13, 2010 at 2:53 pm · I must say that I find it amusing that atheists believe that “afterlife” beliefs spring from a fear of death, when in the Indic religions “life after death” is considered to be a horrifying prospect. [...]