<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Darwiniana &#187; Schopenhauer</title>
	<atom:link href="http://darwiniana.com/category/schopenhauer/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://darwiniana.com</link>
	<description>History, Evolution, and the Darwin Debate</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:31:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Schopenhauer and the not-so-new &#8216;new atheism&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://darwiniana.com/2011/03/17/schopenhauer-and-the-not-so-new-new-atheism/</link>
		<comments>http://darwiniana.com/2011/03/17/schopenhauer-and-the-not-so-new-new-atheism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Schopenhauer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://darwiniana.com/?p=60518</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Schopenhauer And The Caveman Buddhas Schopenhauer, minus his rightwing latencies (which have nothing to do with his transcendental idealism, which he got from the liberal/leftist Kant), would make a better foundation for the New Atheists than the Nietzsche is always present but never mentioned by members of that cult.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://darwiniana.com/2011/03/17/schopenhauer-and-the-not-so-new-new-atheism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lapsed Xtians could do a Schopenhauer ID argument</title>
		<link>http://darwiniana.com/2010/11/27/lapseed-xtians-could-do-a-schopenhauer-id-argument/</link>
		<comments>http://darwiniana.com/2010/11/27/lapseed-xtians-could-do-a-schopenhauer-id-argument/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Nov 2010 19:13:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Evolution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Schopenhauer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://darwiniana.com/?p=54949</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/intelligent-design-pseudoscience-or-a-credible-challenge-to-evolution/ Neither Darwinism nor ID will ever be real science, but ID could be a metaphysical view of nature, but only for post-Christians. Perhaps a variant of Schopenhauer on the &#8216;will&#8217; could do the job for the ID gang, or those of lapsed Xtian faith.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://darwiniana.com/2010/11/27/lapseed-xtians-could-do-a-schopenhauer-id-argument/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Agnosticism and the noumenal</title>
		<link>http://darwiniana.com/2010/06/30/agnosticism-and-the-noumenal/</link>
		<comments>http://darwiniana.com/2010/06/30/agnosticism-and-the-noumenal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 19:11:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Kant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Schopenhauer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://darwiniana.com/?p=47472</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We have already linked today to: An Agnostic Manifesto, but the essay is worth reading. I was often over time &#8216;a sort of atheist&#8217; without realizing it, and this position was really closer to agnosticism than atheism. With the arrival of the New Atheists, vacating the atheist position becomes an necessity since this cultic brand [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://darwiniana.com/2010/06/30/agnosticism-and-the-noumenal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Soul talk and positivistic failure mode</title>
		<link>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/08/soul-talk-and-positivistic-failure-mode/</link>
		<comments>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/08/soul-talk-and-positivistic-failure-mode/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 May 2010 17:16:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Kant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Schopenhauer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://darwiniana.com/?p=44690</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Soul talk No self-respecting professor of philosophy wants to discuss the soul in class. It reeks of old-time theology, or, worse, New Age quantum treacle. The soul has been a dead end in philosophy ever since the positivists unmasked its empty referential center. Scientific philosophy has shown us that there&#8217;s no there there. This article, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/08/soul-talk-and-positivistic-failure-mode/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Schopenhauer and the New Age</title>
		<link>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/07/schopenhauer-and-the-new-age/</link>
		<comments>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/07/schopenhauer-and-the-new-age/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 21:02:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Kant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Age]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Schopenhauer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://darwiniana.com/?p=44631</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[MBFM comment on Karmapa MBFM raises the issue of the right &#8216;Buddhist dharma&#8217; to pursue in the modern world. Original Buddhism is so elegant and simple that the steps would seem transparent, but they are not. Westerners rarely succeed at meditation, while Indians seem to know it all first hand. Deepak Chopra talks a good [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/07/schopenhauer-and-the-new-age/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gould book authors, and materialism/idealism</title>
		<link>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/07/gould-book-authors-and-materialismidealism/</link>
		<comments>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/07/gould-book-authors-and-materialismidealism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 20:01:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Evolution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[physics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Schopenhauer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://darwiniana.com/?p=44624</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Critique of Intelligent Design: Materialism versus Creationism from Antiquity to the Present by John Bellamy Foster, Brett Clark, and Richard York We just discussed the book on Gould by the same two authors who wrote the book above: we have commented here at length on that book, use the search box. It is an interesting [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/07/gould-book-authors-and-materialismidealism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Link to Schopenhauer on death</title>
		<link>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/03/link-to-schopenhauer-on-death/</link>
		<comments>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/03/link-to-schopenhauer-on-death/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 18:13:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Schopenhauer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://darwiniana.com/?p=44421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I keep reciting this post (one of the most popular in the whole history of the blog): The question of soul is rendered chaotic due to the word itself, and it can help to see how easy it is to create a better understanding of the &#8216;soul&#8217; question: Schopenhauer on death Schopenhauer didn&#8217;t really believe [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://darwiniana.com/2010/05/03/link-to-schopenhauer-on-death/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Schopenhauer and transcendental idealism</title>
		<link>http://darwiniana.com/2010/01/14/schopenhauer-and-transcendental-idealism/</link>
		<comments>http://darwiniana.com/2010/01/14/schopenhauer-and-transcendental-idealism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:20:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Schopenhauer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://darwiniana.com/?p=39463</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[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. ‘ I confess to never having [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://darwiniana.com/2010/01/14/schopenhauer-and-transcendental-idealism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hinduism, beliefs in reincarnation, and Schopenhauer on death</title>
		<link>http://darwiniana.com/2010/01/13/hinduism-beliefs-in-reincarnation-and-schopenhauer-on-death/</link>
		<comments>http://darwiniana.com/2010/01/13/hinduism-beliefs-in-reincarnation-and-schopenhauer-on-death/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Schopenhauer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://darwiniana.com/?p=39414</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Comment on post on atheists and reincarnation Very interesing quote. But I think that reincarnation far predates Hinduism (of the post-Vedic brand), and goes back many millennia before. The question is thus often made to seem a mystical belief or a religious tenet, when in fact it should be a deduction about the self beyond [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://darwiniana.com/2010/01/13/hinduism-beliefs-in-reincarnation-and-schopenhauer-on-death/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>An old post: matter, life, consciousness</title>
		<link>http://darwiniana.com/2009/12/18/matter-life-consciousness-2/</link>
		<comments>http://darwiniana.com/2009/12/18/matter-life-consciousness-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:59:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nemo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Evolution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[physics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Schopenhauer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://darwiniana.com/?p=38075</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With respect to the Biocentrism question, and also of the Goswami/Chopra idea of consciousness as fundamental, I wrote a post last spring when the book Biocentrism first came to our attention here: Matter, life, consciousness This post was too harsh, when in fact I was actually expressing interest in the Biocentrism thesis. But as the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://darwiniana.com/2009/12/18/matter-life-consciousness-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

