[Buddha-l] The scientific project and the Buddhist project

[Jo]

All well and good. However, I suggest that some of y'all read one or two of
those books by B. Smith.
Joanna

-----Original Message-----
From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com
[mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Erik Hoogcarspel
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2013 1:25 PM
To: Buddhist discussion forum
Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] The scientific project and the Buddhist project


Richard Hayes schreef op 13-10-2013 20:05:
> On Oct 13, 2013, at 03:39 , jehms <jehms at xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
>> I agree that life consists of different sports played on different
fields, but I always thought of the philosopher as the journalist who tries
to describe and understand what is happening without taking part in any of
those sports.
> Is it possible not to take part in any of those sports?
OK, if you still live you will be playing on several fields at a time. 
In this case I really meant science as a kind of Olympics of 'the will to
know' as Nietzsche called it.
>> So my conclusion is that the DL needs to read Nietzsche or Husserl, or
possible both (and understand them as well) rather than those academic
specialists.
> I just gave away all by books by Husserl. I tried dozens of times to read
them but finally came to the conclusion that I'm just too dull-witted to
understand anything he says. As for Nietzsche, there are few people I love
to read more, although I read him in short doses very far apart for fear
that his insanity might be contagious.
Nietzsche himself advised to take long walks in between reading his texts.
About Husserl: some of his writings are pretty tedious indeed, but his
'Crisis' I consider a good read as well as his Origin of Mathematics. I
suppose however that Jan Patocka is a better choice for Buddhists because of
his asubjective phenomenology.

Erik
_______________________________________________
buddha-l mailing list
buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l