ellauri032.html on line 252: Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point, how often one has heard that quoted, and quoted often to the wrong purpose! For this is by no means an exaltation of the ‘heart’ over the ‘head’, a defence of unreason. The heart, in Pascal’s terminology, is itself truly rational if it is truly the heart. For him, in theological matters which seemed to him much larger, more difficult, and more important than scientific matters, the whole personality is involved.
ellauri080.html on line 498: These two views of the world are, of course, mutually inimical — they inevitably chase each other’s tails. Nietzsche says to Hume: ‘he stole that bread because he wanted to feed his family,’ to which Hume replies, ‘yes, that is true: but why did he want to feed his family? Because he is adhering to a familial principle,’ to which Nietzsche replies, ‘I suppose you could put it that way, but why is he operating according to that principle? It’s because he wants to, because he loves his family,’ to which Hume replies, ‘yes, but why does he love his family? It’s because that is his logical worldview…’ And so on.
ellauri083.html on line 378: “What astounds me,” said Ziering in an interview, is that for the past nearly three decades, people assume that this has been a matter of “he said, she said”—meaning Allen’s word versus Farrow’s. But after Ziering and codirector Kirby Dick began their research, they realized, “Actually, it’s been a ‘he said, he said’ situation. Mia didn’t even speak until the Vanity Fair interview [in 2013]. Never. She is such a private person. That’s really important to know. And she was sort of blindsided by all these events that happened to her. And kept trying to navigate the best that she could just to protect her children and family.”
ellauri096.html on line 151: If paradoxes were always sets of propositions or arguments or conclusions, then they would always be meaningful. But some paradoxes are semantically flawed (Sorensen 2003b, 352) and some have answers that are backed by a pseudo-argument employing a defective “lemma” that lacks a truth-value. Kurt Grelling’s paradox, for instance, opens with a distinction between autological and heterological words. An autological word describes itself, e.g., ‘polysyllabic’ is polysllabic, ‘English’ is English, ‘noun’ is a noun, etc. A heterological word does not describe itself, e.g., ‘monosyllabic’ is not monosyllabic, ‘Chinese’ is not Chinese, ‘verb’ is not a verb, etc. Now for the riddle: Is ‘heterological’ heterological or autological? If ‘heterological’ is heterological, then since it describes itself, it is autological. But if ‘heterological’ is autological, then since it is a word that does not describe itself, it is heterological. The common solution to this puzzle is that ‘heterological’, as defined by Grelling, is not a genuine predicate (Thomson 1962). In other words, “Is ‘heterological’ heterological?” is without meaning. There can be no predicate that applies to all and only those predicates it does not apply to for the same reason that there can be no barber who shaves all and only those people who do not shave themselves.
ellauri171.html on line 602: Jacob means ‘he who grabs for something’ – either his brother’s heel at the moment of birth, or his brother’s inheritance later on
ellauri197.html on line 401: Through this extract of ‘Love’s Organ´s Growth’, the poet, John Donne, says that if love takes such additions (gentle love deeds), as more circles are produced by one stirred in water, those, like so many spheres, make only one heaven, for they are all centered in her. When the poet says: Spheres, he refers to the Ptolemaic astronomy, the spheres were a series of concentric hollow globes which revolved around the earth and carried the heavenly bodies with them. There were supposed to be nine such hollow globes and together they made up what we call the ‘heaven’.
ellauri204.html on line 407: Such a potential often comes at a time of cultural chaos, and we are focussed on the new wave of the mythopoetic – one which considers gender diversity and inclusivity, soul ecology and a story beyond the ‘hero myth’ to which our culture has become so rigidly affixed. This allows for the ancient and deeper archetypes such as the ecologically-focussed Antihero, Green Man and the Shaman-Trickster to arise, offering a less rigid :D , more nuanced and yet expansive approach to whole humanhood.
ellauri263.html on line 670: “One of the most valuable effects of Upasika’s mission [Note: “Upasika” is a Buddhist term meaning “femakko” and was used by the Masters for HPB] is that it drives men to self-study and destroys in them blind servility for persons, sanoi 1 setämies. … Imperfect and very troublesome, no doubt, she proves to some, nevertheless, there is no likelihood of our finding a better one for years to come – and your theosophists should be made to understand it. … HPB has next to no concern with administrative details, and should be kept clear of them, so far as her strong nature can be controlled. But this you must tell to all: – With occult matters she has everything to do. We have not abandoned her; she is not ‘given over to chelas’. She is our direct agent. I warn you against permitting your suspicions and resentment against ‘her many follies’ to bias your intuitive loyalty to her. … Be assured that what she has not annotated from scientific and other works, we have given or suggested to her.
ellauri269.html on line 530: Similarly, the Draenei approach to the Light places next to zero importance on evangelism. This is less ‘headcanony’, as we see a very clear difference in how the humans and Draenei act in this respect. Individual draenei see the Light as immensely important to themselves, but they do not enforce their beliefs on others.
ellauri409.html on line 351: TS Eliot attested to the influence of this poem on his teenage writing. Siinä on samaa arkisen ja pyhän tyylisekaannusta kuin Tompan värsyissä. Jouni ize palvoi algolagnia Swinburnea, joka ei piitannut Jounista tuon taivaallista. Oddly shaped, grumpy and awkward-looking, with a prematurely balding pate and little brown beard, he was known to his students as ‘Jenny Wren’, to others as ‘Cockabendy’. Years later he was independently described as having ‘large and quickly-moving eyes that make one think of some abnormal bird’s’. Davidson himself looked back on these years as ‘shameful pedagogy’ and ‘hellish drudgery’. Jouni ei tullut toimeen runoilulla vaan otti kavereilta vippejä. Sen mielestä mursuwiixi Nietzsche oli the cat´s whiskers. Uskonto on perseestä, me ollaan kaikki jumalia jollain lailla. Lopulta se hyppäs jorpakkoon ja jätti sukulaiset puille paljaille.
10