Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME FORUMS BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:41 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
IS NOTHING SACRED? 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Slut

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4127
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 1130
Thanked: 1179 times in 886 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post IS NOTHING SACRED?
Nothing

Continuing discussion from http://www.booktalk.org/fiction-book-su ... 81-30.html
MaryLupin wrote:
Quote:
Robert Tulip wrote: “Like Someplace to be Flying, Carlos opens a hidden reality. The Yacqui ontology of the tonal and the nagual maps to Heidegger’s distinction of being and nothing.”
I am not sure I would say they open hidden realities as much as either invent them or more exactly, expose metaphorical connections that exist unconsciously and with the aid of the human narrative imagination and our tendency toward projection and anthropomorphization, act as if we have opened a previously hidden reality. Regardless, though, it is one hell of a fun ride.

Hi Mary. If the metaphorical connections exist unconsciously, it seems reasonable to describe them as a hidden reality. There is a problem here regarding the reality of ideas that are derived from construction rather than observation, which seems to me to be at the core of the question of the legitimacy of mythological thinking. Taking Gaiman’s example in American Gods of bringing Odin back to life in the contemporary USA, this seems obviously to be a construction rather than a description. I get the impression Gaiman strikes a nerve with his sense of Gods as a hidden reality. Either he is talking about nothing or something. This twilight world of the Gods seems to be a liminal mixture where the nothing of imagination intrudes into the something of ordinary life. Can an idea such as Odin be important enough to provide the name of a day of the week, but also so unimportant that it refers to nothing real?

Similar arguments apply for all mythological thought, with the popularity of myths serving as an indicator of their perceived or actual utility. People have a constant tendency to mythologise stories to make them easier to remember and more interesting, pushing history into conformance with the mythic archetypes. This ‘invention’ of hidden realities only operates where the ideas in question resonate with psychological needs, most clearly in religious mythology. These psychological needs are far from nothing, but represent the intrusion of an unconscious reality, perceived but not understood. If it doesn’t resonate, the myth goes nowhere.


Quote:
Quote:
Robert Tulip wrote: “Carnap said there is no meaning outside science, rejecting Heidegger’s openness to existential anxiety.”
Caesar is a prime number: Carnap's argument with Heidegger was that he used language in ways that were literally meaningless. That is the sentence " Caesar is a prime number" is neither true nor false; it is meaningless. Carnap argues that Heidegger's logic was based on a number of statements like this and so his argument is linguistically meaningless. I don't think that is the same thing as saying there is no meaning outside science. However, while I agree that many of Heidegger's statements in that particular lecture are meaningless in this way, they are meaningful if read like one reads poetry. I can create a whole series of images based on the sentence " Caesar is a prime number" that create new ways of perceiving the all the things that are metaphorically connected to " Caesar" and "prime number" in my head. So I can gather meaning from the sentence even though it is also meaningless. This points to another problem with language and with Heidegger's use of it that Carnap points out...that the same apparent word can carry very different meanings. Like Being. The fact that we can manipulate it to be a noun like Tree and make the connection that maybe Being and Tree are linked, and get a new way of perceiving the world from that, doesn't make Being existent, nor even if it is existent, does it make it a noun-like entity like a Tree. And I think you can have openness to existential anxiety without making category mistakes "real" even if those very mistakes are meaning producers. Having said that, I do think that Carnap does not go far enough in trying to understand what Heidegger is trying to do.
The distinction here between poetic and scientific meaning is a key one. Heidegger explored this in his comparison between meditative and calculative modes of thought, contrasting the meditative existential engagement with things for use, and the calculative scientific assertion that meaning is always objective and measurable. This question of the meaning of poetic language opens the door to mythological thinking, spurred by Heidegger’s description of nothing as a disturbing reality that pervades existence like a muffled gong.

The claim that being is real is not a category mistake. If being is the whole of reality, containing all entities, then the whole is just as real as the entities within it.

Quote:
Quote:
Robert Tulip wrote: “For Heidegger, openness to anxiety is the source of care, anticipating the future through the context of concern arising from being with others. It almost suggests an evolutionary sense of mutual aid, as discussed by de Waal from Kropotkin.”
I agree about this as a possible source of care (sorge). And I agree that there is an evolutionary tale to be told here.
The ethics of being in the world contrast to conventional rational objective ethics. It seems silly to worry about nothing, except that just in terms of psychology this worry can be a source of real empathy, with real evolutionary advantages. De Waal describes how the calculative Cartesian approach to animal psychology asserted a priori that animals do not feel empathy. I suspect Heidegger’s ontology of ‘being-with’ touches on some of the underpinning assumptions regarding de Waal’s scientific observations.


Quote:
Quote:
Robert Tulip wrote: “The abyss for Heidegger is a problematic thing – almost the terror of the unknown. Carnap’s assertion that human rationality can stare down the abyss of being has a certain arrogance, claiming a level of understanding for empirical science that it does not really possess. These positions seem to me to illustrate the conflict between linear and cyclic theories of time. Carnap interprets time as linear progress, while Heidegger sees cyclic return. Heidegger’s effort to enframe the cosmos in the fourfold of earth and sky, man and gods indicates his sympathy to an older cyclic method of thought, attuned to the natural rhythms and harmonies of the universe.”
I'm not sure what I think about this terror of the abyss. I have written stuff on other writers who contemplate the abyss with existential terror. I have a hard time understanding it. I'm thinking specifically of Simone Weil at the moment. I think that with Weil, the fact that she read the abyss as "real" - that is, as a noun-like entity - was part of the source of her terror. By constituting it that way, the nothing becomes (like Heidegger says) a counter-part of being. Just as the devil is a counterpart of the god. Of course the human body responds to that with terror. But if one doesn't constitute it that way, if the abyss is more like the space between particulate matter, then the body doesn't respond the same way, fear is not generated, but rather a kind of awe, and so looking at the abyss becomes something profound but not impossible to sustain.

For me, this is part of what sorge is - how we constitute our attachment to the things in themselves. It matters what stories we tell to explain the world because they constrain how we experience our lives. So we get a choice - the abyss or the space between (and myriad other possibilities.) I think both Carnap and Heidegger missed the choice-bit of experiential meaning, although Heidegger did have lots to say about doingness.
I tend to interpret the abyss in terms of apocalyptic destruction, the hidden fear that our civilization is ephemeral, and could be wiped away in a moment. By opening a path to a phenomenological eschatology, Heidegger provides some useful analytical tools to interpret the nature of time.

Abyss as interstices is also a valuable idea – if the earth was crushed to make a black hole it would be only two inches across. We are mostly empty space. It illustrates that our common sense perceptions of solidity are illusory. But I don’t think this melting into air is as important a meaning for abyss as the fear of catastrophe.



Sun May 10, 2009 11:27 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Junior

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 324
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanks: 4
Thanked: 6 times in 6 posts
Gender: Female
Country: Canada (ca)

Post 
Robert Tulip wrote:
If the metaphorical connections exist unconsciously, it seems reasonable to describe them as a hidden reality…the question of the legitimacy of mythological thinking…Can an idea such as Odin be important enough to provide the name of a day of the week, but also so unimportant that it refers to nothing real?... These psychological needs are far from nothing, but represent the intrusion of an unconscious reality, perceived but not understood…The distinction here between poetic and scientific meaning is a key one… This question of the meaning of poetic language opens the door to mythological thinking, spurred by Heidegger’s description of nothing as a disturbing reality that pervades existence like a muffled gong….The claim that being is real is not a category mistake. If being is the whole of reality, containing all entities, then the whole is just as real as the entities within it.


I am a human being. Being in this sense has a set of properties that include the substance of which I am composed. Being in this sense also contains the non-substantive “components” of my person, including memories, social needs and other dispositions and capacities. This is a common understanding of what it means to be a human being and it works for a finite entity such as a human person. What happens though, is we recognize fundamental differences between those kinds of “being” which are usually classified with the “body” and those usually classified with the “mind.” When we separate them but still call them both “being” as if they are the same type of “substance” this is exactly what a category error is – at least according to Ryle.

We do the same thing with “real.” It is not to say that the dispositions and capacities that I call “mind” are not as real as those I experience and call “body” but they are “real” in quite different ways. For me the crux of this difference has to do with measurability, although I am not sure this is right. So I can accept the notion of being because my dispositions and capacities are measurability linked to the body-brain complex. This makes my mythological and poetic “realities” real because they are part of the emergent components of my body-brain complex. They are real just exactly in the same way that the sky is blue is real. "Blueness" is an on-going perception that is a “reading” of some substance in the shared universe, where the “reading” is made possible by another substance in the shared universe. It would be an error though to make the “blue” “Blue.” That is to separate the perception from the matrix of its creation and see it as extant outside that matrix as something that predates or preexists the matrix of the shared reality of body-mind-sky. This is what I think we tend to do with our unconscious myths and religions. We make our inner “god” “God.”

So for me the whole of reality does contain a god (actually thousands and thousands of them) but only in the same way that it also contains blue. Blue and god are experiences made possible by the biological emergence of body-brain complexes that can “read” the sky and the body-brain itself and because of that “reading” perceive “blue” and “god.” So they are real but they do not predate the emergence of the b-b complex.

Blue is not a property of the atmosphere but an emergent property of the body-brain-sky complex. God is not a property of the universe but an emergent property of the primarily_unconscious_body-brain_social_mind_with_the_emerging_property_of_self_awareness complex. – Nasty.


Robert Tulip wrote:
The ethics of being in the world contrast to conventional rational objective ethics. It seems silly to worry about nothing, except that just in terms of psychology this worry can be a source of real empathy, with real evolutionary advantages. De Waal describes how the calculative Cartesian approach to animal psychology asserted a priori that animals do not feel empathy. I suspect Heidegger’s ontology of ‘being-with’ touches on some of the underpinning assumptions regarding de Waal’s scientific observations.


Having said all of the above, I want to restate that I do think that mythological-poetic meaning is real, but in the sense that I understand it to be part of the b-b complex. In that sense “nothing” is as real as “being” because both are ontological categories created by the capacity of the b-b complex of social animals to recognize the “other” as separate. It is that space between, I suspect, that gets “read” as the nothing-seed. Not only is there death and the ending of being, but day to day there are the gaps of meaninglessness that exist between two people trying to stay connected across the skin barrier. As de Waal shows with his behavioural studies, we deeply need to stay connected, to understand each other's motives, to make and maintain alliances. We have all kinds of neuronal and social tools to accomplish that but the stakes are really high (which means it comes with a high degree of emotional prompting to push for more and more understanding.) The result is that when faced with regions of non-understanding or non-comprehensibility (like the “alien” or aspects of the non-readable world) we are pushed to make it understandable, to try harder to “read” into it meaning. And our source of data? Ourselves. Our experience. Our histories.

Whether this works or not depends on what we are reading. As de Waal suggests, it probably works just fine when we are reading the faces of chimps. But it doesn’t work when we are reading clouds. It may look like an angry face but it isn’t one.


Robert Tulip wrote:
I tend to interpret the abyss in terms of apocalyptic destruction, the hidden fear that our civilization is ephemeral, and could be wiped away in a moment. By opening a path to a phenomenological eschatology, Heidegger provides some useful analytical tools to interpret the nature of time.

Abyss as interstices is also a valuable idea – if the earth was crushed to make a black hole it would be only two inches across. We are mostly empty space. It illustrates that our common sense perceptions of solidity are illusory. But I don’t think this melting into air is as important a meaning for abyss as the fear of catastrophe.


Taking the abyss (or nothing) to be real in the emergent property sense, I agree that it is a critical point of enquiry with respect to understanding what it means to be a human being. It’s why I studied religion when I first went to university. I’ve never been a believer but have always recognized the centrality of the mythological-religious-poetic mind in the lives of human beings. However, reading the abyss through phenomenological eschatology is only one way (a culturally-religious specific way) to read the nothing. I moved to Anthropology from Religious Studies when I realized that a great deal more effort was going into understanding the nothing if the nothing was constrained by a Judeo-Christian-Islamic set of expectations – and the (to me then) unbelievable mistake that many of the writers were making of assuming that just because they experienced the nothing in a specific way that – 1) it was the “truth” about the nothing and that 2) the nothing they experienced was really the Nothing (i.e. had an independent reality that preceded the b-b complex). The nothing is something very different when experienced by a Navajo or an Interior Salish person or even a European with a very different cultural origin story.

As to Weil - her time and place constrained her reading of the abyss to be something of the divine world. Because of her circumstances the abyss came into her writing taking on the shapes of war and god and the supernatural “reality” that are the metaphorical constants of her time and place. In our world, the abyss does take on a sense of the end of civilization because those are our metaphorical constants. You see them in zombie movies, especially recent ones, and in apocalyptic stories like McCarthy’s –The Road.

Have you read The Sense of an Ending by Frank Kermode? It is one of the best books I have ever read. It is about the relationship between narrative structures in the West and the apocalyptic mind. It explains quite a lot about phenomenological eschatology – that is, why it is such a powerful meaning maker in the West.


_________________
I've always found it rather exciting to remember that there is a difference between what we experience and what we think it means.


Mon May 11, 2009 6:40 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Upper Echelon 1st Class

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2467
Location: New Jersey
Thanks: 502
Thanked: 407 times in 325 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post Please consider
Hello Mary and Robert:

I have enjoyed reading your conversations. I now have another book on my night stand, "Being and Time", Heidegger.

Robert, do you have any interest in becoming the discussion leader for "American Gods"? From the posts I have read I think you have much to offer and could steer us into some interesting conversation.

I have not gotten to Odin yet in AG's but I did stay up quite late last night researching the Queen of Sheba.

Quote:
"What's your name?" he asks her.
"Bilquis," she tells him . . . "with a Q."

"American Gods"

Kinda like Kandy, with a "K".

Just a thought Robert.

Suzanne



Mon May 11, 2009 7:41 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Junior

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 324
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanks: 4
Thanked: 6 times in 6 posts
Gender: Female
Country: Canada (ca)

Post Re: Please consider
Suzanne wrote:
Robert, do you have any interest in becoming the discussion leader for "American Gods"?


A great idea Suzanne. Robert?


_________________
I've always found it rather exciting to remember that there is a difference between what we experience and what we think it means.


Mon May 11, 2009 8:38 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Upper Echelon 1st Class

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2467
Location: New Jersey
Thanks: 502
Thanked: 407 times in 325 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post What do you think?
Well Robert?

Please, pretty, pretty please,

:mbounce:

Suzanne

PS
I promiss, I'll stop annoying you with the bouncing if you say yes!



Mon May 11, 2009 10:55 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Slut

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4127
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 1130
Thanked: 1179 times in 886 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post Re: What do you think?
Suzanne wrote:
Well Robert? Please, pretty, pretty please, :mbounce:
Suzanne PS I promiss, I'll stop annoying you with the bouncing if you say yes!


I would love to lead the discussion on American Gods. I bought a copy yesterday in Borders. After I checked on their self-service in-store catalogue which said it was out of stock, an assistant came up to me and told me the catalogue was wrong, and found me a copy. I am off work at the moment sick with bronchitis, so I spent the rest of the day reading and am now at page 230.

The book was first published in 2001, but a revised edition, including material deleted from the original, came out in 2005, with the subtitle 'Author's preferred text''. Please try to get this revised edition. It is a wonderful book and I highly recommend it to every one.

I liked the bit where Shadow (just released from prison) is in a hotel room and Lucy on the Here's Lucy show on TV starts talking to him to convert him from working for Odin to joining the modern matrix. She corrects him when he calls her Lucille Ball, and says her name is Lucy Ricardo. Shadow says this is "weirder by several orders of magnitude than anything that has happened to me so far."

Odin reminds me of Juan Matus, and his sidekick Mad Sweeney reminds me of Don Genaro.



Mon May 11, 2009 5:32 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Junior

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 324
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanks: 4
Thanked: 6 times in 6 posts
Gender: Female
Country: Canada (ca)

Post Re: What do you think?
Robert Tulip wrote:
I would love to lead the discussion on American Gods.


To quote Suzanne and indicate my own happiness at this state of affairs:

:mbounce:


_________________
I've always found it rather exciting to remember that there is a difference between what we experience and what we think it means.


Mon May 11, 2009 6:58 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Slut

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4127
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 1130
Thanked: 1179 times in 886 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post 
IS NOTHING SACRED?

This is the question asked on the back cover of American Gods. It opens the rather intense irony of Gaiman's writing. He is, in fact, using the book to show that the loss of soul in the USA results in large part from forgetfulness of the sacred, while also tapping in to a new/old philosophy in which the idea of nothing serves as a prism to assess the worldviews of modern times. When everything is profane, nothing is left to revere as sacred. Materialist culture, with its highest values of pleasure and possession of property, regards nothing as sacred, hence Gaiman's sense of a gathering storm. Turning this popular view around, Gaiman almost makes nothing into something - by regarding the myths which formerly provided meaning as something real. His contemporary anthropomorphising of Gods such as Odin, Thoth, Kali, Horus and Anansi brings these nothings into focus as genuine sources of meaning. Is nothing sacred? Yes and no.

Wikipedia for American Gods is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Gods



Mon May 11, 2009 11:54 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Upper Echelon 1st Class

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2467
Location: New Jersey
Thanks: 502
Thanked: 407 times in 325 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post Thank you!
Hello Robert:

Thank you for accepting, I am really looking forward to it.

Robert Tulip wrote:
Quote:
The book was first published in 2001, but a revised edition, including material deleted from the original, came out in 2005, with the subtitle 'Author's preferred text''. Please try to get this revised edition. It is a wonderful book and I highly recommend it to every one.


This is not the edition I have, drat! I have the edition that is advertised on the front page of BookTalk.

Suzanne



Tue May 12, 2009 9:55 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Upper Echelon 1st Class

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2467
Location: New Jersey
Thanks: 502
Thanked: 407 times in 325 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post shout out
Should we shout out to Chris that Robert Tulip has become discussion leader for "American Gods"?

He needs the title to alert readers.

Suzanne



Tue May 12, 2009 10:03 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Owner
Diamond Contributor 3

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 13929
Location: Florida
Thanks: 1911
Thanked: 731 times in 581 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)
Highscores: 10

Post 
I saw Mary's shout in the Shoutbox so I'll add Robert Tulip as the Book Discussion Leader. Thanks Robert. :smile:

We should make threads that the search engines will understand. This thread was labeled "Nothing." Google won't bring new people to this thread with such a name. We're competing with 900,000,000 other pages and sites labeled as "Nothing." I noticed that the intention of this thread is to discuss the back cover question, "IS NOTHING SACRED?" so I've relabeled the thread as such.



Tue May 12, 2009 12:45 pm
Profile Email YIM WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Slut

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4127
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 1130
Thanked: 1179 times in 886 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post 
Chris OConnor wrote:
I saw Mary's shout in the Shoutbox so I'll add Robert Tulip as the Book Discussion Leader. Thanks Robert. :smile:

We should make threads that the search engines will understand. This thread was labeled "Nothing." Google won't bring new people to this thread with such a name. We're competing with 900,000,000 other pages and sites labeled as "Nothing." I noticed that the intention of this thread is to discuss the back cover question, "IS NOTHING SACRED?" so I've relabeled the thread as such.


Nothing would please me more.

:D



Tue May 12, 2009 8:16 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 5251
Location: California
Thanks: 655
Thanked: 1350 times in 1061 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post 
So much for trying to catch up, I'll have to join this one. I've gone through a lot of books from past discussions. I'm on "On Being Certain" right now.



Wed May 13, 2009 12:11 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Slut

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4127
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 1130
Thanked: 1179 times in 886 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post 
Interbane wrote:
So much for trying to catch up, I'll have to join this one. I've gone through a lot of books from past discussions. I'm on "On Being Certain" right now.
Hi Interbane. Great that you will read American Gods. This 'Is Nothing Sacred' line points to the ambiguity in the language we use to discuss mythology. By anthropomorphising the Gods in modern fiction, Gaiman opens a path to interpretation of who they really are, in a twilight between something and nothing. His argument is that the Gods live in people's hearts and die after people forget them. However, this does not make Gods merely subjective, because only those Gods who resonate with perceived needs are remembered. The problem is that the perception of need may not align with actuality, that our Gods may lead us blindly on a path with no future. Gaiman suggests that the wired world has made new Gods, through electronic technology, which are very shallow in their purchase on reality, whereas the older Gods have a deeper resonance with actual longstanding human needs. Did no one get my joke?



Wed May 13, 2009 6:43 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Pop up Book Fanatic


Joined: May 2009
Posts: 12
Location: Connecticut
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post 
Robert,
You say that "Only those Gods who resonate with perceived needs are remembered". Is Gaiman is trying to show that only the "modern, electronic technology Gods" are remembered by "modern era people"? While only the older Gods with connections to longstanding human needs are remembered by "older & wiser" people in the story?



Wed May 13, 2009 8:37 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:

Recent Posts 
Free Mystery Thriller Death In July

Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:57 am

michaeljoseph

What are you currently reading?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:55 am

Crystalline

DARKTIME is Now Available!

Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:29 am

Derek_Rush

Translator services

Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:21 am

alexisaddie

I am not reading anyrhing at the moment

Tue Sep 02, 2014 12:55 am

joel029

Radical Empiricism

Mon Sep 01, 2014 5:31 pm

geo

III. What There Is - "Sense and Goodness Without God"

Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:25 pm

Interbane

New short horror novel series

Mon Sep 01, 2014 2:51 pm

hopton2000

Kevin Peter's Book Reviews

Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:25 am

KevinPeterKP

Hey I got a new book

Mon Sep 01, 2014 2:42 am

mcrosbie


BookTalk.org Links 
Forum Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Info for Authors & Publishers
Featured Book Suggestions
Author Interview Transcripts
Be a Book Discussion Leader!
    

Love to talk about books but don't have time for our book discussion forums? For casual book talk join us on Facebook.

Featured Books

Books by New Authors



Booktalk.org on Facebook 



BookTalk.org is a free book discussion group or online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a group. We host live author chats where booktalk members can interact with and interview authors. We give away free books to our members in book giveaway contests. Our booktalks are open to everybody who enjoys talking about books. Our book forums include book reviews, author interviews and book resources for readers and book lovers. Discussing books is our passion. We're a literature forum, or reading forum. Register a free book club account today! Suggest nonfiction and fiction books. Authors and publishers are welcome to advertise their books or ask for an author chat or author interview.


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSBOOKSTRANSCRIPTSOLD FORUMSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICY

BOOK FORUMS FOR ALL BOOKS WE HAVE DISCUSSED
Oliver Twist - by Charles DickensSense and Goodness Without God - by Richard CarrierFrankenstein - by Mary ShelleyThe Big Questions - by Simon BlackburnScience Was Born of Christianity - by Stacy TrasancosThe Happiness Hypothesis - by Jonathan HaidtA Game of Thrones - by George R. R. MartinTempesta's Dream - by Vincent LoCocoWhy Nations Fail - by Daron Acemoglu and James RobinsonThe Drowning Girl - Caitlin R. KiernanThe Consolations of the Forest - by Sylvain TessonThe Complete Heretic's Guide to Western Religion: The Mormons - by David FitzgeraldA Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man - by James JoyceThe Divine Comedy - by Dante AlighieriThe Magic of Reality - by Richard DawkinsDubliners - by James JoyceMy Name Is Red - by Orhan PamukThe World Until Yesterday - by Jared DiamondThe Man Who Was Thursday - by by G. K. ChestertonThe Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven PinkerLord Jim by Joseph ConradThe Hobbit by J. R. R. TolkienThe Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas AdamsAtlas Shrugged by Ayn RandThinking, Fast and Slow - by Daniel KahnemanThe Righteous Mind - by Jonathan HaidtWorld War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War by Max BrooksMoby Dick: or, the Whale by Herman MelvilleA Visit from the Goon Squad by Jennifer EganLost Memory of Skin: A Novel by Russell BanksThe Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas S. KuhnHobbes: Leviathan by Thomas HobbesThe House of the Spirits - by Isabel AllendeArguably: Essays by Christopher HitchensThe Falls: A Novel (P.S.) by Joyce Carol OatesChrist in Egypt by D.M. MurdockThe Glass Bead Game: A Novel by Hermann HesseA Devil's Chaplain by Richard DawkinsThe Hero with a Thousand Faces by Joseph CampbellThe Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor DostoyevskyThe Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark TwainThe Moral Landscape by Sam HarrisThe Decameron by Giovanni BoccaccioThe Road by Cormac McCarthyThe Grand Design by Stephen HawkingThe Evolution of God by Robert WrightThe Tin Drum by Gunter GrassGood Omens by Neil GaimanPredictably Irrational by Dan ArielyThe Wind-Up Bird Chronicle: A Novel by Haruki MurakamiALONE: Orphaned on the Ocean by Richard Logan & Tere Duperrault FassbenderDon Quixote by Miguel De CervantesMusicophilia by Oliver SacksDiary of a Madman and Other Stories by Nikolai GogolThe Passion of the Western Mind by Richard TarnasThe Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K. Le GuinThe Genius of the Beast by Howard BloomAlice's Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll Empire of Illusion by Chris HedgesThe Sound and the Fury by William Faulkner The Extended Phenotype by Richard DawkinsSmoke and Mirrors by Neil GaimanThe Selfish Gene by Richard DawkinsWhen Good Thinking Goes Bad by Todd C. RinioloHouse of Leaves by Mark Z. DanielewskiAmerican Gods: A Novel by Neil GaimanPrimates and Philosophers by Frans de WaalThe Enormous Room by E.E. CummingsThe Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar WildeGod Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher HitchensThe Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco Dreams From My Father by Barack Obama Paradise Lost by John Milton Bad Money by Kevin PhillipsThe Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson BurnettGodless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists by Dan BarkerThe Things They Carried by Tim O'BrienThe Limits of Power by Andrew BacevichLolita by Vladimir NabokovOrlando by Virginia Woolf On Being Certain by Robert A. Burton50 reasons people give for believing in a god by Guy P. HarrisonWalden: Or, Life in the Woods by Henry David ThoreauExile and the Kingdom by Albert CamusOur Inner Ape by Frans de WaalYour Inner Fish by Neil ShubinNo Country for Old Men by Cormac McCarthyThe Age of American Unreason by Susan JacobyTen Theories of Human Nature by Leslie Stevenson & David HabermanHeart of Darkness by Joseph ConradThe Stuff of Thought by Stephen PinkerA Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled HosseiniThe Lucifer Effect by Philip ZimbardoResponsibility and Judgment by Hannah ArendtInterventions by Noam ChomskyGodless in America by George A. RickerReligious Expression and the American Constitution by Franklyn S. HaimanDeep Economy by Phil McKibbenThe God Delusion by Richard DawkinsThe Third Chimpanzee by Jared DiamondThe Woman in the Dunes by Abe KoboEvolution vs. Creationism by Eugenie C. ScottThe Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael PollanI, Claudius by Robert GravesBreaking The Spell by Daniel C. DennettA Peace to End All Peace by David FromkinThe Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey NiffeneggerThe End of Faith by Sam HarrisEnder's Game by Orson Scott CardThe Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time by Mark HaddonValue and Virtue in a Godless Universe by Erik J. WielenbergThe March by E. L DoctorowThe Ethical Brain by Michael GazzanigaFreethinkers: A History of American Secularism by Susan JacobyCollapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed by Jared DiamondThe Battle for God by Karen ArmstrongThe Future of Life by Edward O. WilsonWhat is Good? by A. C. GraylingCivilization and Its Enemies by Lee HarrisPale Blue Dot by Carl SaganHow We Believe: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God by Michael ShermerLooking for Spinoza by Antonio DamasioLies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them by Al FrankenThe Red Queen by Matt RidleyThe Blank Slate by Stephen PinkerUnweaving the Rainbow by Richard DawkinsAtheism: A Reader edited by S.T. JoshiGlobal Brain by Howard BloomThe Lucifer Principle by Howard BloomGuns, Germs and Steel by Jared DiamondThe Demon-Haunted World by Carl SaganBury My Heart at Wounded Knee by Dee BrownFuture Shock by Alvin Toffler

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOur Amazon.com SalesMassimo Pigliucci Rationally SpeakingOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism BooksFACTS Book Selections

cron
Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2014. All rights reserved.
Website developed by MidnightCoder.ca
Display Pagerank